Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Xbox 360

User Score
3.4

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 8706 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. Oct 16, 2012
    5
    I've played this game for a year and I've finally made up my mind about it. I really want to like this game, and it isn't an awful game, but hell, is it frustrating, the maps could've been better, the weapons are okay, the killstreaks are good, and the perks are okay (if not some are a bit overpowered,) however, it annoys me that they haven't really gone anywhere with the game from MW2,I've played this game for a year and I've finally made up my mind about it. I really want to like this game, and it isn't an awful game, but hell, is it frustrating, the maps could've been better, the weapons are okay, the killstreaks are good, and the perks are okay (if not some are a bit overpowered,) however, it annoys me that they haven't really gone anywhere with the game from MW2, the graphics are pretty much the same, the only thing they've really developed are the killstreaks, it's basically just replaying MW2, their new games are alright, however they seem to be let down by the flaws, a prime example of this is infected, this should be a great game, however it's disappointing due to the terrible spawning, inaccurate knifing (my friend knifed forward and hit someone behind him) and even throwing knives are sometimes dodgy, this game should be good, but it was a lazy move from infinity ward, and I hope that they actually go somewhere for BO2 because this is just a cash in, to sum up, the game doesn't take any steps forward, and the flaws are so annoying, it'll make many gamers frustrated, I wish I'd saved my money while I could of Expand
  2. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    Honestly, I don't know how the critics hold this game in such high esteem. It should be sold at half the retail price as it is essentially an expansion to MW2. As a COD fan, I am disappointed that Infinity Ward didn't do more with this. It's almost like they know that we will buy their games and just ignore the fact that it's like we are buying a second copy of MW2. I'm sorry Infinity WardHonestly, I don't know how the critics hold this game in such high esteem. It should be sold at half the retail price as it is essentially an expansion to MW2. As a COD fan, I am disappointed that Infinity Ward didn't do more with this. It's almost like they know that we will buy their games and just ignore the fact that it's like we are buying a second copy of MW2. I'm sorry Infinity Ward but I think Dice weren't wrong when they said that Battlefield 3 was made to rival the COD franchise, as it certainly brings more to the table than MW3. Expand
  3. Nov 9, 2011
    5
    Don't get me wrong, this game is a ton of fun to play. My problem is that they're making me spend $60 on whats supposed to be a new game. When it's really the same game but with some added goodies. You can argue that "zelda and mario follow this same repetitive style". And yes, that is somewhat accurate, but they do something new and fresh in everyone of those games that makes you likeDon't get me wrong, this game is a ton of fun to play. My problem is that they're making me spend $60 on whats supposed to be a new game. When it's really the same game but with some added goodies. You can argue that "zelda and mario follow this same repetitive style". And yes, that is somewhat accurate, but they do something new and fresh in everyone of those games that makes you like every single one of their games because they're different from one another. With Call of Duty, you're always liking the newest one the best because they just keep barely building on to the same thing. Expand
  4. Nov 8, 2011
    5
    I remember when a sequel to a game meant innovation. I remember when developers were judged based on innovation in addition to the quality of the game.

    Mw3 is a structurally solid game, and why shouldn't it be, it is the same formula since call of duty 4. So while the mechanics work well, they offer nothing new. It is the same game as black ops with a new coat of paint , and some new
    I remember when a sequel to a game meant innovation. I remember when developers were judged based on innovation in addition to the quality of the game.

    Mw3 is a structurally solid game, and why shouldn't it be, it is the same formula since call of duty 4. So while the mechanics work well, they offer nothing new. It is the same game as black ops with a new coat of paint , and some new maps. There is nothing new here, If you are looking for a fresh experience then look somewhere else , maybe buy an indi game. If you are looking for the same familiar multiplayer you love from the series , than just save your money and go back to black ops. The game is simply a cash in , pure and simple.
    Expand
  5. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    Nothing really new to the series if you played the cod of the past pretty much you played this game. It's not a bad game just seems like they went through the usual cod checklist from last 6 years of putting these games out. I wouldn't pay $60 for this game. Multiplayer seems pretty much the same as last few games of the series and the same old formula for the single player shoot mob ofNothing really new to the series if you played the cod of the past pretty much you played this game. It's not a bad game just seems like they went through the usual cod checklist from last 6 years of putting these games out. I wouldn't pay $60 for this game. Multiplayer seems pretty much the same as last few games of the series and the same old formula for the single player shoot mob of enemies move forward down a liner path to next checkpoint rinse and repeat seems to plaque this series well fps in general this genre need some fresh ideas or will be doomed. I mean there are some new ideas but nothing that going to give you the wow factor back when most people played the original cod mw. I think I'll pass this one up i need more substance in my fps. Expand
  6. Nov 9, 2011
    5
    I'm not a fanboy from battlefield or any other FPS try to scorch MW3. I'm hardcore CoD supporter for the past few years. But to be honest, MW3 is really disappointing in term of both single player and MP mode. I still remember the hype I had when I played MW2, but I get tired even just half of the MW3 campaign. Everything is just repacked from MW2. The new perk system and killstreak systemI'm not a fanboy from battlefield or any other FPS try to scorch MW3. I'm hardcore CoD supporter for the past few years. But to be honest, MW3 is really disappointing in term of both single player and MP mode. I still remember the hype I had when I played MW2, but I get tired even just half of the MW3 campaign. Everything is just repacked from MW2. The new perk system and killstreak system is the only good thing in MP. Biggest issues in MP3 is the map design. All map feel very similar, small, maze-like, cage-like. Every map feel the same. There is no defense line you can set up with your teammate, you have to run all the time and whoever get faster reflex and better connection win the gun fight. I know IW try to remove camper as much as possible. But the removal of the strategic play only makes MW3 MP like a cheap arcade shooter. Expand
  7. Nov 9, 2011
    5
    Came here because I read Glen Schofield was asking people to post honest reviews. I loved Call of Duty 4, loved World at War (Even though Treyarch made it), loved Modern Warfare 2 (Before the glitchers and hackers got ahold of it), absolutely detested Black Ops (Retarded single player story), and was really looking forward to Modern Warfare 3. I love it and at the same time I'm not tooCame here because I read Glen Schofield was asking people to post honest reviews. I loved Call of Duty 4, loved World at War (Even though Treyarch made it), loved Modern Warfare 2 (Before the glitchers and hackers got ahold of it), absolutely detested Black Ops (Retarded single player story), and was really looking forward to Modern Warfare 3. I love it and at the same time I'm not too fond of it. Sure the single player story isn't perfect, but I really enjoyed it and how it ended the story arc. I was a little bit disappointed on the multiplayer aspect of the game. I still can't believe that after so many years IW refuses to use dedicated servers for consoles and relies on the asinie P2P hosting. I am so sick of the whole I shot first but when I watch the kill cam, no rounds came out of my weapon and the other person got the kill because they have the faster connection. Also, the maps seem very claustrophobic compared to the other Modern Warfare games. Like Black Ops, there aren't many sniper friendly maps. AND QUICKSCOPING! Why has that been brought back? It has to be the most annoying feature I have ever seen. It does not make you a badass player. It just makes you an annoying prick who relies on the aim assist because you suck at aiming down the sights. I really hope IW monitors this game and does not let hacking overrun it like COD4 and MW2. I really hope the new maps coming out are less claustrophobic and more along the vein of COD4 and MW2. I'm sorry but this will be the last Call of Duty game I purchase and if Infinity Ward doesn't step up their game, then this will probably be the last Call of Duty game for a lot of people. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD INFINITY WARD! GO BACK AND FIX CALL OF DUTY 4'S MULTIPLAYER! FOR ONCE I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK TO THAT GAME AND ENJOY A ROUND OF TEAM DEATH MATCH WITHOUT BEING KILLED BY SOME DOUCHEBAG WHO IS GOING UNDERNEATH THE MAP OR USING WALLHACKS! Expand
  8. Nov 9, 2011
    5
    I am neither a CoD or BF fanboy - I happen to enjoy shooters of all stripes and have since the age of Wolf 3D. That said, it honestly baffles me how the CoD franchise can copy and paste every iteration and keep getting 9's. Any other franchise that would DARE copy and paste would be panned for being unoriginal, for copying past elements, and for generally not innovating between titles. AndI am neither a CoD or BF fanboy - I happen to enjoy shooters of all stripes and have since the age of Wolf 3D. That said, it honestly baffles me how the CoD franchise can copy and paste every iteration and keep getting 9's. Any other franchise that would DARE copy and paste would be panned for being unoriginal, for copying past elements, and for generally not innovating between titles. And people wonder why "professional" reviewers are distrusted? |||| The sad reality of MW3 is that it looks and plays just like MW2 and Black Ops. There's little to no graphical difference between them, there's really no gameplay changes between them other than the renaming of some of the kill/death streaks. The AI is bad, the voice overs are bad, the maps are small and campy, et cetera. It's basically a carbon copy of MW2 and Black Ops. |||| Now I'm sure people will say "the game was perfect and sold millions so they don't need to change anything". To say the game was perfect is hubris of the highest order though no one can dispute that it sold millions. However, consider, in the same time frame, that Epic Games continually tweaked UE3 for the Gears franchise, making each one richer than the previous, DICE brought out a new engine this generation for BFBC2 and BF3, and Bungie modified the Halo 2 engine for H3 and ODST while making an entirely new engine for Halo: Reach. But Call of Duty? To quote one of its own callsigns: S.S.D.D. I don't think it's too unreasonable to ask for at least a new engine and some better graphics after all these years, even if they leave the core gameplay the same. |||| The game is enjoyable but it's AVERAGE. The engine and the gameplay style show their ages. I honestly would be hard pressed to recommend MW3 to someone who is still having fun with MW2 or Black Ops because they'd just be spending money to get the same experience they already have. |||| (PS. Metacritic, when can we get carriage returns for our reviews so they're not big walls of text?) Expand
  9. Nov 11, 2011
    7
    I can see where some of the criticism comes from. It does seem a lot like MW2.5 rather than MW3. I'm a little disappointed that it's pretty much a better version of the game we've already had for the past two years. Every COD game has been substantially better than the previous one. MW3 seems only SLIGHTLY better than Black Ops and MW2.
  10. Nov 8, 2011
    7
    Without a fanboy rating I'll give this game what it deserves. The story is a joke, same **** as every year...just even more predictable cheese and effects. Details like the foreign cities where presented with lots of mistakes and even lots of spelling mistakes...embarrassing.
    the multiplayer is nothing new either.

    rent or pass
  11. Nov 8, 2011
    6
    It's hard, really. On one side you have a formula polished over and over, movie-like singleplayer campaign, addicting multiplayer. On the opposite side you feel like you've been here before a dozen times, it's the thing dressed with a higher number and a few new perks. This series requires a bit of amnesia from you. If you can provide that and treat every new installment to the series likeIt's hard, really. On one side you have a formula polished over and over, movie-like singleplayer campaign, addicting multiplayer. On the opposite side you feel like you've been here before a dozen times, it's the thing dressed with a higher number and a few new perks. This series requires a bit of amnesia from you. If you can provide that and treat every new installment to the series like something completely new - you'll like it. But if you've spent your time with CoD, there are only two possible options: a) you'll love it like all previous episodes of the CoD franchise b) you'll yawn after 5 minutes and then turn the game off. I, unfortunately, am in the second group Expand
  12. Nov 8, 2011
    7
    More of the same? Well yeah, obviously. There's new editions to the title like strike packages, survival mode, continuation of the story but they're not major. If you never liked Call of Duty, this won't change your mind. If you're like me and enjoy Call of Duty, then you will enjoy this. Simple as that.
  13. Nov 8, 2011
    7
    Wow. Just wow. At the time of this writing, MW3 has garnered an average of 3.2 from Meta users. I understand that CoD is the biggest series in the world and thus millions of people are going to swear they hate it, but come on guys. MW3 is not a "bad" game. It doesn't deserve props for being new or exciting, it gets no credit for being above and beyond what MW2 is, but at the end of theWow. Just wow. At the time of this writing, MW3 has garnered an average of 3.2 from Meta users. I understand that CoD is the biggest series in the world and thus millions of people are going to swear they hate it, but come on guys. MW3 is not a "bad" game. It doesn't deserve props for being new or exciting, it gets no credit for being above and beyond what MW2 is, but at the end of the day, what were we expecting? This game is so widespread that Activision could have forced the developers to start completely from scratch and make a new kind of CoD and people would still find reasons to hate it. The fact of it is, CoD outsells itself as the highest-selling game of all time year after year, and that's for a reason. The vocal haters of CoD are in the minority, by far. Activision knows that, and they now that they are guaranteed money if they just tweak the formula and offer players *just* enough incentive to come back. Seeing as how most of the millions upon millions of gamers to buy MW3 will be casuals who want nothing but a game to play in their spare time, that idea makes sense. I was a huge CoD4:MW fan, and my interest in the series has diminished (as is the case with many of you) over the past few installments. I've been playing MW3 but won't buy it for myself for a long time. But let's not be disingenuous: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is not a bad game, it just isn't an exciting or completely new experience. It doesn't deserve a "0," it doesn't deserve a "10," it's just another typical shooter in the over-populated shooter market. Expand
  14. Dec 30, 2011
    6
    I was mad at first because a lot of reviews were written by people paid by the bf3 staff, a game that is unpolished and inferior by comparison. HOWEVER... Several issues make this game inferior to past call of duty offerings:

    1) Claustraphobia/Poor Maps - the maps are all claustrophobic, have few if any interesting cover/sniper points, rarely anything you can climb on etc. It's as if
    I was mad at first because a lot of reviews were written by people paid by the bf3 staff, a game that is unpolished and inferior by comparison. HOWEVER... Several issues make this game inferior to past call of duty offerings:

    1) Claustraphobia/Poor Maps - the maps are all claustrophobic, have few if any interesting cover/sniper points, rarely anything you can climb on etc. It's as if they were designed in 15 minutes with no regard for anything. To make matters worse, spray cannon weapons can be accurate with the new anti-kick weapon specialization, almost eliminating the use of precision high damage weapons like sniper rifles. Anything resembling a snipers nest is easily accessible from 3 different directions guaranteeing you will get snuck up on and killed after 1 or 2 kills. 2) Widespread hacking - not IW's fault but a lot of people are using wall hacks that tell where enemies are behind walls. These are not blatant hacks, but ones that make people look like they are playing legitimately until you watch their kill cam and see them tracking people perfectly through walls. 3) Poor netcode - perhaps not as bad or Black ops (or about as bad) this game uses the noob friendly netcode where you will often find yourself getting killed AFTER you run behind cover, or killed BEFORE the person who is shooting you even comes around the corner on your screen. Generally speaking, just a noobified version of call of duty.
    Expand
  15. Nov 8, 2011
    6
    Reviews of this game on Metacritic are HORRIBLY biased from a fanboy point of view. Being a fan of all first person shooter games, I feel that I am eligible to post to valid review of the game.

    Campaign: The campaign is fantastic. It meets all expectations of the game, and more. The story is very refreshed and is NOT a 'rehash' of other games in the series. 10/10. Multiplayer: I do not
    Reviews of this game on Metacritic are HORRIBLY biased from a fanboy point of view. Being a fan of all first person shooter games, I feel that I am eligible to post to valid review of the game.

    Campaign:

    The campaign is fantastic. It meets all expectations of the game, and more. The story is very refreshed and is NOT a 'rehash' of other games in the series. 10/10.

    Multiplayer:

    I do not feel I can review the Multiplayer as of yet as I have not played it enough. Expect a further review of the multiplayer on a later date.

    Engine/Graphics: Although the engine and graphics of this game do not meet those of a certain competitor in the FPS genre, they are still much better than some on the market, and again, are no where near as bad as have been suggested. Although it is disappointing that the graphics could not be improved, the engine is still better (in my eyes) than the same certain competitor. This is because of the very nice, crisp sound that is a huge improvement over both IW 4.0 and Black Ops' varient 3.0. 8/10

    Gameplay:

    Now this is where I believe the game REALLY stands out. The gameplay of Call of Duty, especially this installment (which has gone back to the trademark gameplay of COD4) is usually fantastic. The AI is well polished and MUCH better than a certain competitor on the market and you actually become attached to the characters that you play as. 10/10

    Overall, I give the game 9.5/10, which I will round to 10/10 in order to combat the obviously fanboy-esque reviews of the game.

    If you want to verify that I am not a 'fanboy' myself, please see my other reviews of both Call of Duty and Battlefield installments. This game DOES NOT deserve 2.8 (at this time of writing), and you if you've played it you know that.
    Collapse
  16. Nov 8, 2011
    7
    Same gameplay, same graphics, same sound, and the worst same multiplayer, i prefer battlefield 3, its a much better game in all aspects, and i love the multiplayer in that game.
    No es que el juego sea del todo malo, pero es exactamente lo mismo que los anteriores, la campaña no esta tan mal, exageradisima eso si, pero el multijugador me parece estupido, repetitivo, solo
    Same gameplay, same graphics, same sound, and the worst same multiplayer, i prefer battlefield 3, its a much better game in all aspects, and i love the multiplayer in that game.
    No es que el juego sea del todo malo, pero es exactamente lo mismo que los anteriores, la campaña no esta tan mal, exageradisima eso si, pero el multijugador me parece estupido, repetitivo, solo correr y disparar como loco, y a años luz del gran multijugador de battlefield, trabajo en equipo, estrategia, mapas enormes y mucho mejores graficos (basta con comparar Paris en ambos juegos) y sonido soberbio.
    Expand
  17. Jan 31, 2012
    5
    On the multiplayer game I have one issue. They basically took the original system for earning attachments, and made it easier. You dont need headshots, just kills. I likes the original because it took skill to get headshots. Anybody can spray with a fully-auto assault rifle and kill. It takes skill to aim with that rifle and hit them in the head. The graphics? Great! The maps? Cool! ButOn the multiplayer game I have one issue. They basically took the original system for earning attachments, and made it easier. You dont need headshots, just kills. I likes the original because it took skill to get headshots. Anybody can spray with a fully-auto assault rifle and kill. It takes skill to aim with that rifle and hit them in the head. The graphics? Great! The maps? Cool! But honestly, the multiplayer is pretty much identical to CODMW2 Expand
  18. Jan 28, 2014
    6
    Kind of an ehh game, it's like a crappy version of mw2, infinity ward really messed up on this one. Not a horrible game, but not a game to get. .
  19. Jan 17, 2012
    6
    I dare say that most of the uber negative reviews on here were written by people who've logged 5 or more days in MW3's multiplayer alone. But, I digress. MW3 is a fine game with nothing inherently wrong with it. The problem with cod nowadays is not the games themselves, but the community. Having been a cod vet since 2006, I can categorically state that cod has, by far, the WORST communityI dare say that most of the uber negative reviews on here were written by people who've logged 5 or more days in MW3's multiplayer alone. But, I digress. MW3 is a fine game with nothing inherently wrong with it. The problem with cod nowadays is not the games themselves, but the community. Having been a cod vet since 2006, I can categorically state that cod has, by far, the WORST community in all of gaming. The community is selfish, lazy, stat-obsessive & far too shaped by Youtube. If you're looking for a skill based, objective oriented shooter, skip it, just move on down the aisle & find another title. But, if you're just looking for some mindless fun & you couldn't care less about stats because you just want to shoot some people in the face, pick it up, because there's nothing wrong with the game itself. Expand
  20. Dec 11, 2011
    6
    Multiplayer: Being a hardcore CoD fan (15+ days in MW1, MW2, Black Ops, 3+ K/D ratio in all of them), I was disappointed. I loved all the other CoD games but that doesn't mean I don't play the crap out of it. The maps are badly designed and don't have the aesthetic pleasure nor the versatility of the maps in previous games. The weapons need a lot of work. The Type 95 is highly overpoweredMultiplayer: Being a hardcore CoD fan (15+ days in MW1, MW2, Black Ops, 3+ K/D ratio in all of them), I was disappointed. I loved all the other CoD games but that doesn't mean I don't play the crap out of it. The maps are badly designed and don't have the aesthetic pleasure nor the versatility of the maps in previous games. The weapons need a lot of work. The Type 95 is highly overpowered and overused, as well as the PP90M1, and the MK14 could use a slight damage reduction. Singleplayer: A lot of people are saying they don't like the singleplayer. I loved it. I started out on Veteran and it had my blood rushing the whole time. Lots of intense combat moments and cool locations for missions as well as all the characters that we've come to love. R.I.P. Soap Expand
  21. Dec 16, 2011
    6
    this is the worst modern warfare in the series, mostly due to the multiplayer maps. the gunplay is really really smooth, bring back the older maps and ill be interested, until then you can keep your rubbish arena style maps with a stupidly large amount of spawnkilling
  22. Nov 19, 2011
    6
    I just got screwed by the marketing machine. I was expecting a game with improvements in gameplay, graphics and sound. Kinda works like that otherwise we would all be still paying pong and pacman.

    Not in this case. Exactly the same as his predecessors which are two year old games. I paid a lot of money for a game with little effort. The 1 is to compensate for the fanboys give this 10's
    I just got screwed by the marketing machine. I was expecting a game with improvements in gameplay, graphics and sound. Kinda works like that otherwise we would all be still paying pong and pacman.

    Not in this case. Exactly the same as his predecessors which are two year old games. I paid a lot of money for a game with little effort. The 1 is to compensate for the fanboys give this 10's and that includes that corrupt game journalist whose sites shall not be visited anymore ( just gamespy who gave a fair judgement)
    Expand
  23. Dec 6, 2011
    5
    No stopping power, but Infinity Ward kept last stand. Terrible idea. No Ricochet on Hardcore modes. Another big mistake. Why change weapon stats from previous games? Totally unbalanced weapon loadouts. These single player campaigns need a major overhaul, enough with the scripted events already. Look folks this formula has run its course now. Call of Duty Elite is just a cash grab.No stopping power, but Infinity Ward kept last stand. Terrible idea. No Ricochet on Hardcore modes. Another big mistake. Why change weapon stats from previous games? Totally unbalanced weapon loadouts. These single player campaigns need a major overhaul, enough with the scripted events already. Look folks this formula has run its course now. Call of Duty Elite is just a cash grab. Make a game worthy of tracking stats on and people will take it more seriously. These fresh developers simply cannot fill the shoes of the originals. R.I.P. Call of Duty. Expand
  24. Apr 8, 2012
    5
    First off I wanted to write a mw3 review for a while its a complete review from the story to spec ops all the way to the criticality acclaimed multilayer. Story: Its hard to give a review without giving out spoilers but il try :) The story basically takes off where MW2 left its WW3 and Soap Mactavish and Captain Price have to stop Makarov. Now without giving spoilers I will tell you thatFirst off I wanted to write a mw3 review for a while its a complete review from the story to spec ops all the way to the criticality acclaimed multilayer. Story: Its hard to give a review without giving out spoilers but il try :) The story basically takes off where MW2 left its WW3 and Soap Mactavish and Captain Price have to stop Makarov. Now without giving spoilers I will tell you that they're are fundamental plot holes in the story that dont require a genius to figure out. Apart from that, its still fun, missions are varied, entertaining and dont require much skill even on veteran compared to black ops that is but the ending will give you a great surprise. Spec Ops. Spec ops is very fun, mission are varied but are way to easy even on veteran, and survival was a brilliant addition to this spec ops. It's good to get the DLC from COD elite as well. Multiplayer: although the multiplayer is fun, its a copy paste from MW2, top to bottom, many weapons, game titles, sound effects, as well as kill streaks all come from previous titles (espacially MW2). Well some people do tell me why change what's great? Well I would normally agree the core gun on gun game play is still they're but is being hindered by MAJOR balance issues from perks to weapons, no dedicated servers, lack of team play as well as knife issues all that with a terrible spawn system. The maps all feel the same. Probably the most disappointing aspect of the game. Even Robert Bowiling the creative strategist said this in an interview : "I feel like we are in a f*cking era where everyone is so focused on subscriber numbers and all that stuff that we need to get back to what I feel like we did so much better in the old days of just plain good will, like stuff like the LAN patch, yeah it is lower priority but letâ Expand
  25. Nov 11, 2011
    5
    A good game if you hadn't seen it before. If this was the first of it's kind we would all love it. Instead paid $60 for a slightly tweaked MW2 with smaller multiplayer maps. Played it for 4 hours will be giving it away tomorrow. Too many good games out there to invest any more time. On Xbox I think they have already figured out how to do the care package glitch. Haven't played the campaignA good game if you hadn't seen it before. If this was the first of it's kind we would all love it. Instead paid $60 for a slightly tweaked MW2 with smaller multiplayer maps. Played it for 4 hours will be giving it away tomorrow. Too many good games out there to invest any more time. On Xbox I think they have already figured out how to do the care package glitch. Haven't played the campaign may give it a shot. Expand
  26. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    Glorified map pack is what MW3 is. Maps are too small making snipers ineffective, hit detection is super wonky and single player is only 5 hrs long. Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops are much better games. Kinda of fun but don't waste 60 dollars on this.
  27. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    When I play Modern Warfare 3, all i can think of is how this game could have been so good. The game has a deceptive single player and a copied multi-player. The single player game is just like a B-movie. Explosions, bullets flying, and add Military jargon to mix and you have the single player portion of Modern Warfare 3. When the Modern Warfare 3 commercial includes WW3, I expect fullWhen I play Modern Warfare 3, all i can think of is how this game could have been so good. The game has a deceptive single player and a copied multi-player. The single player game is just like a B-movie. Explosions, bullets flying, and add Military jargon to mix and you have the single player portion of Modern Warfare 3. When the Modern Warfare 3 commercial includes WW3, I expect full scale front lines war, like World at War. I wasn't expecting tactical teams going street to street following tanks. This is not WW3.

    The multiplayer is exactly the same as Modern warfare 2 and Black Ops. Perks, Unlockable guns, and killstreaks are all apart of the multiplayer. The only difference is that we get a new mode called survival. Survival is the only reason, in my opinion, to get this game. It is fun. The only thing is it is two player. It Would be better with more than two players.

    I give this game a 5 because of the lackluster single-player, the copycat multiplayer (but fun Survival). I really hope that this Franchise does not turn into another Madden.
    Expand
  28. Nov 16, 2011
    5
    I am HIGHLY disappointed with this game. It's not so much the game sucks in and of itself, as it is I wish I had purchased Skyrim and waited for this game to drop in price. This game is like DLC for MW2 with a few tweaks. The Multiplayer is the exact same game with different maps. The camping is absolutely ATROCIOUS and the new game modes wear thin quickly. You'll be bored with themI am HIGHLY disappointed with this game. It's not so much the game sucks in and of itself, as it is I wish I had purchased Skyrim and waited for this game to drop in price. This game is like DLC for MW2 with a few tweaks. The Multiplayer is the exact same game with different maps. The camping is absolutely ATROCIOUS and the new game modes wear thin quickly. You'll be bored with them after a day. The Campaign is mediocre at best. It is painfully obvious that the COD:MW franchise has exhausted all of it's Shock and Awe in the first two series. It throws nothing shocking at you like "No Russian" or your guy dying in a Nuclear blast. The new characters it introduces are forgettable and the plot just has a predictable, flat and sudden end. I wouldn't complain if I had only spent like 29.99 for this down the road. But this isn't worth forking over $60. Now I have to wait until my next payday to purchase Skyrim.

    Booooooooo.
    Expand
  29. Nov 21, 2011
    6
    If you enjoyed MW2 then you are definetly going to enjoy MW3, due in large because its the same exact game. I found nothing new in the single player campaign, but there seems to be a few more options for multiplayer. Having said that, I still enjoy playing the game and think that its a definite buy.
  30. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    Like it or not, MW3 has changed very little from MW2. The SP is the same type of campaign filled with explosions in an attempt to get your blood rushing yet ends up being boring half-way through. It's also filled with hundreds of plot holes just like MW2 had. The multiplayer has changed very little. Now, instead of killstreaks, you have pointstreaks which is a failed attempt from IW to getLike it or not, MW3 has changed very little from MW2. The SP is the same type of campaign filled with explosions in an attempt to get your blood rushing yet ends up being boring half-way through. It's also filled with hundreds of plot holes just like MW2 had. The multiplayer has changed very little. Now, instead of killstreaks, you have pointstreaks which is a failed attempt from IW to get rid of selfish gamers. The new gamemode - kill confirmed - actually does the opposite of what it was made to do. IW put in kill confirmed into the long list of gamemodes to try to reduce camping by forcing the killer to retrieve a dog tag the enemy drops. However, during my time with the game, I found that people would just camp in a corner, kill someone, wait to see if anyone else is around, then collect the dog tag and run back to their camping spot. Another thing that bothered me was the incredible amount of glitches the game had. IW finished the game about a month and a half early. They could have used that extra time to iron out the game (this is actually why I didn't give the game an 8).

    All-in-all, this game has really disappointed me. The days of Cod4 and fun run n' gun gameplay seem to be over for the CoD franchise. If I were any of you, I would skip this game and save my money.
    Expand
  31. Dec 3, 2011
    6
    This is an honest review of the game. While the campaign is fun it is only five hours long with little replay value. Multiplayer is fun for a few hours but then it becomes super repetitive and frustrating. The series was once fun but it honestly an average experience now. I can't really even justify a score above a 7. But don't pay attention to all the 0s. This game is certaintyThis is an honest review of the game. While the campaign is fun it is only five hours long with little replay value. Multiplayer is fun for a few hours but then it becomes super repetitive and frustrating. The series was once fun but it honestly an average experience now. I can't really even justify a score above a 7. But don't pay attention to all the 0s. This game is certainty above a zero, but not close to amazing. Expand
  32. Dec 24, 2011
    5
    call of duty modern warfare 3 is bad it just extremely boring with noting new.
  33. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    I came here because Sledgehammer Games' Glen Schofield wants more honest reviews, here's mine:

    The Single player has some of the best action I've ever experienced in a game, the story is still ridiculous and the pointless/heartless "vacation" scene was a desperate and lame attempt at having that "controversial moment" that gets plugged into each CoD so it can make the evening news, Bad
    I came here because Sledgehammer Games' Glen Schofield wants more honest reviews, here's mine:

    The Single player has some of the best action I've ever experienced in a game, the story is still ridiculous and the pointless/heartless "vacation" scene was a desperate and lame attempt at having that "controversial moment" that gets plugged into each CoD so it can make the evening news, Bad form IW. The guns sound awful, every time I shot the M4 it made me want to shake my head. The way bad guys get treated in cut scenes will make you smile, but that's about it.

    Multiplayer looks and feels like MW2. Hit detection is awful, I can't count how many times the kill cam does not match what happened. Shame on Activision/IW for taking all this money they make and not getting dedicated servers."New" Strike Packages and Maps make it seem different I guess. If you are not tired of CoD, then you will like it. If you've moved on, this will not bring you back.

    Personal Opinion: Like CoD4, I bought it for the SP. Unlike CoD4, I was not pleasantly surprised at the MP. MW2 turned me away from the Franchise and toward BFBC2, Black Ops brought me back in for a month until I saw there error of my ways and went back to BC2. Feeling Disappointed in how the Console version of BF3 turned out (I have PC version, too) I was kind of hoping MW3 would reel me back in, but about a couple hours of MP made me realize how tired of this I am, and how good BF3 really is, even on 360. I was actually playing BF3 on 360 the same night MW3 was released.
    Expand
  34. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    The game isnt completely bad i think the graphic's took a step back and the maps are not amazing but the game overall is still pretty decent. Its probably gonna take a few weeks for them to work out all the kinks in there servers but its still a good game.
  35. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    MW3 was clearly a 60 dollar mappack to MW2 and it borrowed heavily from Black Ops. It's great in it's own right- the fact that people would annually dish out 60 dollars for the same rehashed game, and, all in all, it is good, basic, arcade fun. It will sell over 10 million. It's easily accessible, and that is its strength. If you want a newer version of COD4 (basically more sh!t to use)MW3 was clearly a 60 dollar mappack to MW2 and it borrowed heavily from Black Ops. It's great in it's own right- the fact that people would annually dish out 60 dollars for the same rehashed game, and, all in all, it is good, basic, arcade fun. It will sell over 10 million. It's easily accessible, and that is its strength. If you want a newer version of COD4 (basically more sh!t to use) this is the game for you. If you are waiting for a good COD game...stick with mw2. Expand
  36. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    It's a decent game, I don't see why people hate it. Sure it's the same every year but so is virtually every sports game out there if they can create an annual game that everyone loves why can't Call of Duty? Overall I enjoyed this game although not as much as previous COD's. The graphics are decent if seeming more and more dated each year. Audio is competent if not amazing. The gameplay isIt's a decent game, I don't see why people hate it. Sure it's the same every year but so is virtually every sports game out there if they can create an annual game that everyone loves why can't Call of Duty? Overall I enjoyed this game although not as much as previous COD's. The graphics are decent if seeming more and more dated each year. Audio is competent if not amazing. The gameplay is as great as it has always been with a fast and frenzied play style. The single player is enjoyable if like other COD's even though you'll probably forget about it not long after you've played. The Multiplayer like always is where it's at and like other Call of Duty's it's a blast. My only real complaint is that not enough is new in this installment and almost not deserving of the 3 as this feels like an expansion rather then a new game. If you love COD buy this if not, go troll some other game that you obviously spent no real time on and went in with a complete bias against it. Expand
  37. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    MW3 is a solid game, but given all the hype I expected more. The graphics are probably the best thing about the game, but great graphics don't guarantee a great game. I like the single player campaign, but the AI could be much better. Mutliplayer has been disappointing.
  38. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    Modern Warfare 3 is yet another take on an already perfected system, which fails to deliver anything innovative this time round. I stress that itâ
  39. Nov 11, 2011
    6
    For what is essentially Modern Warfare 2.5, this year's update to the series provides little improvement over it's previous installments. Sporting a tedious and overall average capmaign that is littered with quick-time events, cheap deaths & linear on-rails levels Modern Warfare 3 proves that sometimes taking a new sheet of paper and starting from scratch is the best option. WithFor what is essentially Modern Warfare 2.5, this year's update to the series provides little improvement over it's previous installments. Sporting a tedious and overall average capmaign that is littered with quick-time events, cheap deaths & linear on-rails levels Modern Warfare 3 proves that sometimes taking a new sheet of paper and starting from scratch is the best option. With multiplayer almost identical to it's last time around and little in the way of new features It is a tough purchase to recomend unless you're a veteran junkie to the series and can't go for 5 minutes without calling in a care package. For £45/$60, there are bigger, better & more action packed shooters out there.

    Save your money and give this one a rent, you might regret buying...
    Expand
  40. Nov 17, 2011
    6
    This game is just another addition to the COD series. Nothing innovating, just create a sequel and sell it because of the brand. The franchise needs innovation to stay alive and this game does not do it justice. Everything that is claimed to be "new" is just a rip off of other great games that not everyone knows of. The problems with the past games are still in this game. There is noThis game is just another addition to the COD series. Nothing innovating, just create a sequel and sell it because of the brand. The franchise needs innovation to stay alive and this game does not do it justice. Everything that is claimed to be "new" is just a rip off of other great games that not everyone knows of. The problems with the past games are still in this game. There is no innovation, just the same old stuff. Expand
  41. Dec 9, 2011
    5
    Out of all the CoD games this one has spurred me the most thus far. Lack of innovation all around. It's still the same fun addicting ranking up prestige ranking up again mutliplayer that's captured that hearts of little boys and teen's on the cusp of entering manhood while reverting some back to a childhood state. I would of rated this much higher if it weren't for a few problems first offOut of all the CoD games this one has spurred me the most thus far. Lack of innovation all around. It's still the same fun addicting ranking up prestige ranking up again mutliplayer that's captured that hearts of little boys and teen's on the cusp of entering manhood while reverting some back to a childhood state. I would of rated this much higher if it weren't for a few problems first off the spawning in this game is horrid spawning someone behind me is just play insane in my mind, 2nd spawning me into actual gunfire is just a infuriating and lastly spawning me all alone with 2 guys running at me from the get go thanks a lot IFW. Second the quick scoping should be taken out you shouldn't be able to fire that rifle til you see the scope I know this won't defeat it the act entirely but it'll limit it some. Lastly an this has to be my least favorite thing the stealth bomber kill streak should be a Assault one or the very last support one (16 kills perhaps? 18?) it's rather annoying when you hear that roaring of one that right after another and another an another. All in all BF3 gets shooter of the year when its all said and done since its a fresh new product. Expand
  42. Nov 21, 2011
    6
    There's not really a whole lot to say - MW3 is truly showing its age at this point. The single-player campaign was decent, albeit more of the exact same thing we've had in the previous two MW titles. The multiplayer is where I, personally, was really let down, the whole thing feels more like an expansion pack to MW2 than a game in its own right. How this is able to get such high criticThere's not really a whole lot to say - MW3 is truly showing its age at this point. The single-player campaign was decent, albeit more of the exact same thing we've had in the previous two MW titles. The multiplayer is where I, personally, was really let down, the whole thing feels more like an expansion pack to MW2 than a game in its own right. How this is able to get such high critic reviews is beyond me - but at the same time MW3 isn't riddled with bugs and is definetly playable, so there won't be a zero rating from me. Expand
  43. Nov 25, 2011
    6
    Coming fresh off Black Ops, I hated this game at first. Mainly because of the less damage it takes to kill an opponent and thus be killed. But now as the maps become more familiar the game is more fun. Great graphics, but theres really nothing better about this game than MW2, its basically a $65 map pack. This game gets a 6 because activision seems to be putting forth a lot of effortComing fresh off Black Ops, I hated this game at first. Mainly because of the less damage it takes to kill an opponent and thus be killed. But now as the maps become more familiar the game is more fun. Great graphics, but theres really nothing better about this game than MW2, its basically a $65 map pack. This game gets a 6 because activision seems to be putting forth a lot of effort eliminating hackers, modders and all the other serious problems with the other modern warfares. Expand
  44. Nov 25, 2011
    6
    As an avid player of Call of Duty titles for the past 6 or so years I have to say I'm quite disappointed with Modern Warfare 3. The single player Campaign is not why I bought Modern Warfare 3, but I did enjoy the plot for the modern warfare series (especially the first one), but I can't really say I feel the same about this game's campaign. The plot was weak at best, bouncing aroundAs an avid player of Call of Duty titles for the past 6 or so years I have to say I'm quite disappointed with Modern Warfare 3. The single player Campaign is not why I bought Modern Warfare 3, but I did enjoy the plot for the modern warfare series (especially the first one), but I can't really say I feel the same about this game's campaign. The plot was weak at best, bouncing around from location to location fighting off Makarov's shinnanigans with different teams of undeveloped characters who for some reason all seem to know each other closely with very little explanation of how (particularly Sandman and Price).

    Spec-ops is basically horde-mode from Gears of War, was fun for about 30-40 minutes and then I got bored, I'm sure there are people out there that will enjoy it, but it's not really my thing and I didn't feel that it had too much in the way of extended entertainment value.

    Now to the real core of Call of Duty; the multiplayer. They essentially threw out the majority of the positive changes black ops had implemented, made a rehashed version of their player statistics into call of duty elite which you can't even check in game between matches. They brought back quick scoping (which is basically nothing more than abusing aim assist), location lock Javelin missiles which have more power than a predator missile and can reach more than half way across the map. The maps themselves are filled with tight corners and I swear the flanking routes to the flanking routes have flanking routes...combine that with what can be questionable spawning locations and claymores/bouncing bettys which only work maybe 30% of the time you can expect to be shot in the back a lot. New strike packages are pretty cool, Assault is pretty much the same as ever, I think Specialist is awesome, and then there's support which for reasons unknown holds the stealth bomber killstreak. Aside from maybe the sentry gun, which I can accept as more of a defensive oriented killstreak a strike package that doesn't reset on death should not have offensive based killstreaks like a stealth bomber which I usually see about 5 times a match if not more. Advanced UAV, Stealth Bomber and EMP were some of the most valuable killstreaks attainable in previous games, now they're tossed around like loose change, even if your actively seeking out and killing the players on the other team who are getting kills you can do nothing to deny them these streaks which can be relatively frustrating. My final gripe with this game isn't a balance issue but the matchmaking and hosting in general, the lag and poor connectivity in games is horrendous, 3/4 games will have lag issues, 1/4 will just die and send you back to the lobby, I've never had these issues playing any of the previous Call of Duty titles (should probably note I play on xbox360).

    In summary I wouldn't write this game off completely, it has a lot of potential, and it still has the solid mechanics of any modern warfare game, but they've definitely taken a few steps backwards, and if you're a player used to a high K/D ratio be prepared to get really frustrated as maintaining much above a 2-1 k/d is a lot more difficult than previous games.
    Expand
  45. Nov 30, 2011
    6
    Call of Duty my favorite franchise. I was disappointed with this game. I expected more than I got. I would never ever ever give this game a 0 or a 1 its call of duty. I didn't like black ops and I would say this game is way better. ITS STILL CALL OF DUTY I am sure people love call of duty, and think about it this game is not like some dora or spongebob game made in a year or less this isCall of Duty my favorite franchise. I was disappointed with this game. I expected more than I got. I would never ever ever give this game a 0 or a 1 its call of duty. I didn't like black ops and I would say this game is way better. ITS STILL CALL OF DUTY I am sure people love call of duty, and think about it this game is not like some dora or spongebob game made in a year or less this is call of duty and for you haters that put a 0 or 1 or even negative are a disgrace! Sure it wasn't what you expected. But the game had a decent multiplayer and campaign! You acted like it was 2d and the graphics were like a free computer game. No this game had great graphics and yeah great graphics like Mw2. But back to the point it was not a 9 or a 10 or a 8 unless of course u just picked it up and never played any other cod you would give it a 10. Back to the point the maps was the most I was disappointed in! *THIS GAME DIDNT FEEL RIGHT TO ME!! I thought it was a alright game and I have played all COD and am a pro at gaming in COD. I UNDERSTAND PEOPLES PAIN!! But don't say goodbye to the franchise and don't talk smack about the game. It was disappointing and leave it at that. AND NO OTHER FRANCHISE CAN BE BETTER THAN COD!! Expand
  46. Dec 12, 2011
    5
    Same old same old. If you like the other Call of Duty games, then you will like this game...for awhile any way. In despite need of fresh game play ideas. The story is average, and multi player is repetitive. All in all it's good enough.
  47. Feb 26, 2012
    6
    This game was over-hyped and ended up as a disappointment. The story line was very bare, extremely rushed, totally unrealistic, and had no value or meaning behind it. Barely any connections with the characters, so I did not feel for them. The entire game was focused on gameplay, which was pretty much an exact copy of modern warfare 2. It even looked the same, just about. When I boughtThis game was over-hyped and ended up as a disappointment. The story line was very bare, extremely rushed, totally unrealistic, and had no value or meaning behind it. Barely any connections with the characters, so I did not feel for them. The entire game was focused on gameplay, which was pretty much an exact copy of modern warfare 2. It even looked the same, just about. When I bought this game I had a hope that this game would deliver. When the menu came up and I started playing, I thought I was playing Modern warfare 2 accidentally and had to check the box and the disc. Lol jk but you get my point. Multiplayer is too flawed to compare to its predecessor, but to me it is more fun and addictive. This game's saving grace is the multiplayer. Expand
  48. Jun 13, 2012
    5
    Despite the huge hype, critic's positive appraisals and record breaking sales Modern Warfare 3 ultimately disappoints. Although the game is robust the Call of Duty franchise is becoming stale there is no innovation here. It is the same game as it's predecessor with slightly updated graphics. There are four modes in the game Campaign, Spec Ops, Survival and multiplayer. The Campaign isDespite the huge hype, critic's positive appraisals and record breaking sales Modern Warfare 3 ultimately disappoints. Although the game is robust the Call of Duty franchise is becoming stale there is no innovation here. It is the same game as it's predecessor with slightly updated graphics. There are four modes in the game Campaign, Spec Ops, Survival and multiplayer. The Campaign is about 4 to 5 hours which is pretty average for a modern FPS again you will find nothing new here it has it's set pieces and guided path. Spec Ops returns it can only be described as a challenge mode to people who don't know it can be a lot of fun playing co-op. Then there is survival which is surprisingly fun it's basically fighting waves of increasingly tougher enemies. Finally multiplayer is where the biggest problems exist the small field of few, small maps and bad spawns.
    These problems in multiplayer makes most encounters a death trap which will punish new players and irritate the hardened veteran. Now don't get me wrong this game is solid if you enjoy the fps genre but I cannot recommend it to the average gamer. To the call duty fan give it a go make up your own mind but I feel it is going to be the same experience as it's predecessors. To the average gamer there are cheaper, better and more interesting games to spend you're money on. The Call of Duty series needs to try something new instead of cashing in on previous successes before people lose interest. The sad fact is this franchise might have to die before we see innovation.
    Expand
  49. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    Again, I eagerly awaited the release of the next COD game in the series, usually with preference for the IW-developed games, seeing as though they were responsible for the Super Mario 3 of this generation, COD4:MW. It's painful for me to say this, but I am not having fun with this game.

    I have to say up front, that I'm not a big campaign guy. The campaign might be excellent, but I don't
    Again, I eagerly awaited the release of the next COD game in the series, usually with preference for the IW-developed games, seeing as though they were responsible for the Super Mario 3 of this generation, COD4:MW. It's painful for me to say this, but I am not having fun with this game.

    I have to say up front, that I'm not a big campaign guy. The campaign might be excellent, but I don't buy these games for the single-player. My ratio of single to multi player is probably around 2:200. But that's just the problem, the multiplayer is awful. Rather than being innovative, IW decided to stick with their same upgrade system to enjoy perks and weapon addons. Say what you will about Black Ops, but it did revolutionize multiplayer "earnings" with COD cash that was useful in skipping boring sights, weapon addons, etc. so you could get right to your preferences without waiting until level 70. This game goes with the same boring method of earning your way to everything, something that just won't peak my interest after the honeymoon period.

    We are still stuck with the same engine, that pretty much makes it easy for people to die yet harder to kill. I am still baffled at the fact that with such a complex dynamic database, I am still playing maps I don't want to. Why am I still playing with idiots that barely touch my level of FPS skill? Is IW really still having trouble trying to fix multiplayer? I know this isn't IW because bad matchmaking was why I quit playing Black Ops. I just cannot understand why I still have to be placed on a team with idiots. Is it really so hard to match skill level?

    Spawning seems as worse as ever. Can no one figure a decent algorithm for spawning already? Are we still stuck in 2002? At least place more spawn zones. The entire map should be spawn zones so that the usual "furthest from enemies" algorithm will work better. It certainly doesn't help that your maps are like a Swiss cheese of obstacles. Imagine a maze. Now imagine all vertical lines removed. This is what these maps are playing like. I could hide behind one half wall for security, but I'm completely open from 3 other angles. What's the point?

    Could someone PLEASE work with committees to get this game right. I would gladly fly out on my own dime to be apart of a committee because these things are so easy to detect and fix before you release anything. You need review and QA committees because this game is just awful when it comes to so many factors. I want the product to succeed. I want people to get back what they are paying for in quality gaming. I fear that if you keep releasing this stuff without checking in with others, you will eventually lose your franchise to a competitor. I remember when IW used to listen to its people when Bungie didn't. This is EXACTLY what happened with Halo.
    Expand
  50. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    Lo unico que me gustaba de Call of Duty MW2 y Black Ops, es que CORRER es infinito!!! y ahora en MW3 lo quitan, aunado a eso agregan mapas sumamente grandes dificiles de accesar con la velocidad del soldado normal... Echaron a perder un muy buen juego, la escencia de MW es ser un juego arcade... Ahora siento que estoy jugando bad company 2.
  51. Nov 11, 2011
    6
    Ok I don't mind that it is the same engine or that they reuse textures. It is what it is. It still looks good and runs smooth. So far I like the single player but truthfully have not gotten very far yet. My main gripe is with multiplayer. After all the hype from reviews and previews I was expecting a more balanced gameplay with the ability to use tactics. Additionally I had read in reviewsOk I don't mind that it is the same engine or that they reuse textures. It is what it is. It still looks good and runs smooth. So far I like the single player but truthfully have not gotten very far yet. My main gripe is with multiplayer. After all the hype from reviews and previews I was expecting a more balanced gameplay with the ability to use tactics. Additionally I had read in reviews that you could play as more of a support role if you weren't in the balls-to-the-wall run-n-gun mood. Boy was I disappointed! Other users are right, the maps suck! As do the rampant cheaters, spawning, balance, and speed of the game. First the cheating: how fun is it for someone to wall hack, aim bot, and lag switch EVERY time they play a game? Doesn't it get old? Do you really think you are GOOD at the game when you do it? Anyway expect to see A LOT of cheaters in multiplayer. Next the maps: They are all horrible, small choke point filled messes. Why even bother having different classes? There IS NO balance! Run n gun is the only good tactic here (if you can call it tactics). The spawn points do not help as other players can spawn right behind you in an area that you cleared. My most important gripe is the speed of the games. Come on IW! Im 43 and still love multiplayer games. Not everyone is a 13 y/o kid with a ton of free time and a .00000000001 sec response time! You are going to lose a good portion of your fan base if you keep going in this direction! Too fast! What was wrong with the pacing of the previous games (seeing how you like to reuse things from previous games)? I loved the series before, but this one has me jumping ship as far as future releases. I will rent it next time before I buy it. Dont get me wrong, I do like some new aspects of the game: confirmed kill, the new weapons, and the leveling up system to name a few. However, my gripes outweigh my positives in terms of making an enjoyable experience. Sorry, but Battlefield definitely wins this round for me! (No Im not a fan boy. I played both equally before). Expand
  52. Nov 19, 2011
    6
    Another year another call of duty. Modern Warfare 3 is a game that will be familiar with most gamers because much hasn't changed or been improved upon since the last one in the series. The one thing that has been improved upon is a couple of elements of multiplayer such as strike packages and the prestige shop. Strike packages allow players who are more/less skilled to hone theAnother year another call of duty. Modern Warfare 3 is a game that will be familiar with most gamers because much hasn't changed or been improved upon since the last one in the series. The one thing that has been improved upon is a couple of elements of multiplayer such as strike packages and the prestige shop. Strike packages allow players who are more/less skilled to hone the killstreaks they receive to how they play, and it is a welcome addition to Call of Duty as is the prestige shop. No longer will you prestige and only receive a emblem, title, and an extra create a class slot. Now you can choose what you want whether that be double xp, early weapon unlocks, and resetting your stats if you reach 10th prestige. These are changes that help the game, unfortunately much hasn't changed from the last Modern Warfare or Call of Duty for that matter and many problems still persist such as lag, hit detection that's off, odd grenade bounces, and maps that are forgettable. If you've bought a Call of Duty in the last four years this will feel no different but it does conclude the story and there will be more people to play with. Expand
  53. Nov 21, 2011
    5
    I played CoD2 and CoD4 like a mad man on my PC and eventually got Black Ops for my 360. So I'm no fanboy. However - this game is not worth $60. It's the same rehashed crap over and over, year after year. There is simply not $60 worth of improvements to be found.
  54. Mar 12, 2012
    5
    Where's the originality? The innovation? Where's the passion? These are the questions I asked myself when I bought and played this game. For a triple A title, it really shows that not everything that's triple A is actually good. I consider this game to be mediocre at best, considering the agonizing decay of innovation and originality that the CoD games are peppering us with lately. Go withWhere's the originality? The innovation? Where's the passion? These are the questions I asked myself when I bought and played this game. For a triple A title, it really shows that not everything that's triple A is actually good. I consider this game to be mediocre at best, considering the agonizing decay of innovation and originality that the CoD games are peppering us with lately. Go with Battlefield 3 instead. You'll be glad you did. Expand
  55. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    I was looking forward to completing the campaign, and while it had a few "holy crap this is crazy" moments, but other then that, kind of boring, I felt MW2 campaign was more exciting. Multiplayer is essentially the same, even the layout of all the menus are exactly as they were MW2, the maps feel small and uninspired. Many of the mechanics if MW3 did not change, I expected some innovationI was looking forward to completing the campaign, and while it had a few "holy crap this is crazy" moments, but other then that, kind of boring, I felt MW2 campaign was more exciting. Multiplayer is essentially the same, even the layout of all the menus are exactly as they were MW2, the maps feel small and uninspired. Many of the mechanics if MW3 did not change, I expected some innovation or changes, most of it is copy and paste. The best aspect of MW3 is the special ops missions and survival mode, with its own ranking system and numerous unlocks it is enjoyable alone or with a friend. Overall it felt as if COD took a step backwards from Black OPS and just released a expansion for MW2. MW3 makes me appreciate Battlefield 3 that much more. Expand
  56. Nov 11, 2011
    6
    As I was being quick scoped the other day, it hit me, "I'm playing a revised version of MW2!" Coming from a true supporter of the MW franchise, a fanboy some might say, this was a  hard thing to say. As I play more of MP, I get bitter that this game hasn't changed much from the previous rendition. Take  proficiencies out,  what do you have? MW2. TheAs I was being quick scoped the other day, it hit me, "I'm playing a revised version of MW2!" Coming from a true supporter of the MW franchise, a fanboy some might say, this was a  hard thing to say. As I play more of MP, I get bitter that this game hasn't changed much from the previous rendition. Take  proficiencies out,  what do you have? MW2. The atempts of making the game balanced, works. But removal of marathon and leaving in quick scoping doesn't. Where's the innovation? This is what MW2 should have been.  Expand
  57. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    The videos released by IW and sledgehammer have been mouth watering, The way the game looked and the new features to kill streaks look amazing. I am a massive Modern warfare fan but the trailers reminded me of dead island. lots of promise but does it truly deliver?

    The Multiplayer is what most players buy the game for, the chance to link up with friends and have a blast. this hasn't
    The videos released by IW and sledgehammer have been mouth watering, The way the game looked and the new features to kill streaks look amazing. I am a massive Modern warfare fan but the trailers reminded me of dead island. lots of promise but does it truly deliver?

    The Multiplayer is what most players buy the game for, the chance to link up with friends and have a blast. this hasn't changed, its still enjoyable but there is also so much wrong with it. The levels feel bland and identikit. I'm really disappointed with the multiplayer level design. MW2 levels felt like thought had gone into them. there is 16 multiplayer levels, this makes me think about the saying quality over quantity. The new kill streak system now takes into all players from the excellent to the poor. The poor can choose to allow kill streaks to roll over even after death, but they are not as powerful as the assault kill streak which include your usual AC-130s etc etc. the balance is there but it doesn't make you feel like you have stumbled across something special. MW3 Multiplayer feels old and everything you wanted to change in MW2. Does that make it MW2.5? i on the edge. its tried and tested but after a few hours i feel i'm treading old ground way to often. If i'm honest i didn't expect anything more due to the split in the production but with sledgehammer on board i was hoping they would be able to add something to it and in the end they didn't.

    One area i would like to say so far i am enjoying is the single player, yes its your normal set piece after set piece but FPS need that. they are boring without it, look at Medal of honor. after every level i played i felt like i had completed something epic. the story is obviously ridiculous but if you look passed that and play with an open mind, there is no reason why you cant enjoy it. Overall i would say this game is retreading old ground with a few tweaks. A game of this magnitude shouldn't be looking to tweak but reinvent. this release has lowered the stock of the franchise, and allowed its competitors to close in.
    Expand
  58. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    I feel totally robbed with this game. We were Promised so much and yet I don't feel that this game has improved at all, if anything I believe they've made the multiplayer close to unplayable. If I'm honest I'm not the best player online but it's never stopped me enjoying playing hours on multiplayer with the previous COD games. MW3 though is very frustrating, it lacks so much that we nowI feel totally robbed with this game. We were Promised so much and yet I don't feel that this game has improved at all, if anything I believe they've made the multiplayer close to unplayable. If I'm honest I'm not the best player online but it's never stopped me enjoying playing hours on multiplayer with the previous COD games. MW3 though is very frustrating, it lacks so much that we now expect in a FPS games, I mean really simple things such as spawning, maps and weapons. The biggest thing that I'm disappointed about MW3 is the maps. Those days of choosing whether to sniper or creep round out flanking are well and truly gone, the maps are designed for just one way to play and that's run around like a headless chicken and shoot!! 0 tactics and no sense of you working as a team. The maps also show no kind of creativity, there's nothing new that we haven't seen before. On the plus side, the campaign is just what I wanted and enjoyed the final part to the story. And that's why I've award it a 5, but like most games this day it's all about the online experience, and quite frankly it just doesn't cut it, there's a bigger dog now in my opinion which is laying a path for the future for FPS's and that's Battlefield 3. It has everything, huge maps, the opportunity to make weapon semi auto to automatic, a selection of vehicles, realistic damage and the real sense that you are in a real battle. I applaud EA stepping up their game and for once making them serious contenders as king of FPS. MW3 I fear will not be taken out of it's case as much as the other previous games and I'm gutted and feel rather let down :( Expand
  59. Nov 22, 2011
    5
    the campain was ok, but way too short and pretty much relies on set pieces to keep people interested, i have only played spec ops 5 times but can honestly say iv never really enjoyed it. when i first played multiplayer i loved it but after a day it just got boring, should have just been a map pack for mw2
  60. Nov 8, 2011
    6
    The game is decent give it what it deserves it is not fantastic and it is not terrible. It is the same as the last game with some new spec ops missions. Oh by the way salemshaikh Battlefield 3 fans are not going to leave for this over hyped game. A game should be able to stand alone on its single player which neither games could do. So what I am trying to say ineffectively is that bothThe game is decent give it what it deserves it is not fantastic and it is not terrible. It is the same as the last game with some new spec ops missions. Oh by the way salemshaikh Battlefield 3 fans are not going to leave for this over hyped game. A game should be able to stand alone on its single player which neither games could do. So what I am trying to say ineffectively is that both games were disappointments to me. Both games get a six in my book. Expand
  61. Nov 20, 2011
    7
    COD Black Ops is a better game than Modern Warfare 3. I say this after playing Black Ops for an entire year! I still believe that the campaign of the game should be the number 1 draw. If i am going to spend 60 bucks and stand outside in the cold at midnight for a game it should be spectacular in not only multiplayer but the single player campaign as well. IGN, 1up, and Gamespot are givingCOD Black Ops is a better game than Modern Warfare 3. I say this after playing Black Ops for an entire year! I still believe that the campaign of the game should be the number 1 draw. If i am going to spend 60 bucks and stand outside in the cold at midnight for a game it should be spectacular in not only multiplayer but the single player campaign as well. IGN, 1up, and Gamespot are giving these high scores to this game based on its multiplayer component. The only Modern Warfare that should be given 9's and 10's should be Modern Warfare 1. It was original in every way and had a vastly enjoyable multiplayer component. If though MW3 has a lot of blockbuster moments within it's campaign it feels very repetitive to play. I thought the ending of the game should have be waaaay better. Although i'll play the game for the next year because i'm hopelessly addicted to multiplayer i still think the campaign is not the bomb. As a matter of fact Modern Warfare 2's campaign really sucked! The only reason the buy this game is for multiplayer. If you bought it for the campaign good luck! Expand
  62. Nov 8, 2011
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This game is the best game I've ever played. The graphics are more realistic than real life, and I feel like I'm really shooting terrorists in the face with every press of R1. The sound literally made my ears orgasm, which I didn't even know was possible. A quick check of Wikipedia reveals that it shouldn't be possible, but for the purpose of the review I will assume that Sledgehammer Games has hired a few wizards to add the final touches to the game. I was rock-hard the entire time I played through the intense, cinema-like single player, and the multi-player may just be the most fun thing ever created. Yes, even better than Slinkies. Literally the only bad parts about the game are the fact that Soap and Yuri die, and the game isn't Battlefield 3, so I'm docking a few points. You owe it to yourself to buy this game, if you don't then you're missing out on literally the greatest shooting game that every has or ever will be made. Expand
  63. Nov 12, 2011
    5
    a 60 dollar patch, this is mw3, it's obvious to see how many reviewers gave this game 9's and 10's when honestly this game deserves a 5 at best. It just goes to show you how many idiotic consumers are out there in the world, hopping on the bandwagon and buying anything their friends are getting. They also love to dick ride devs like mindless brainwashed retards they are, willing to doa 60 dollar patch, this is mw3, it's obvious to see how many reviewers gave this game 9's and 10's when honestly this game deserves a 5 at best. It just goes to show you how many idiotic consumers are out there in the world, hopping on the bandwagon and buying anything their friends are getting. They also love to dick ride devs like mindless brainwashed retards they are, willing to do anything these devs command. mw3 has only added killstreaks, perks and a few new guns.....THATS IT. If you bought this game because it's "fun", then i suppose mw2 was fun, and black ops and cod4 since they all play exactly the **** same. paying 60 bucks for a few stuff added when really all of this could have been patched just goes to show you the retards of the gaming industry. A month later wait till all these idiots complain about the BS in the game, wasting their money on yet another purchase on this yearly overhyped infested piece of crap. Expand
  64. Nov 9, 2011
    7
    MW3 would be a great game if it is you're 1st cod experience. For COD veterns its just an update. Sort of. The overall score of the game should be decided if you are still playing it in a months time. I didnt like the game after an hour or a day. But i still went back to play it the following day.its growing on me. The game feels different from previous installments of COD but they haveMW3 would be a great game if it is you're 1st cod experience. For COD veterns its just an update. Sort of. The overall score of the game should be decided if you are still playing it in a months time. I didnt like the game after an hour or a day. But i still went back to play it the following day.its growing on me. The game feels different from previous installments of COD but they have tried to update a system thats over 4 yrs old. Maybe we need a new console to satisfy the general gaming public.MW3 is not without its problems but BF3 suffers a similar fate. If you're not sure whether to buy it,rent it 1st. Expand
  65. Nov 9, 2011
    5
    Albeit an oddity I'm sure, I have never played any of the other modern warfare games. After playing black ops and loving it with my friends I was so excited to play this. Its something I really can't put my finger on...It just doesn't feel right to me. The graphics are...OK and the sound is....OK and the game play is...again...OK. There's really NOTHING special about this game. All in allAlbeit an oddity I'm sure, I have never played any of the other modern warfare games. After playing black ops and loving it with my friends I was so excited to play this. Its something I really can't put my finger on...It just doesn't feel right to me. The graphics are...OK and the sound is....OK and the game play is...again...OK. There's really NOTHING special about this game. All in all I'm very disappointed with it and will be selling it. Expand
  66. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    I was looking forward to MW3 bringing something new to the table to match BF3. It actually just feels like a big DLC update for me. :( I'm not sure what the developers could have done differently with the same tech they've been using for their past several games but I think they should've tried something different.
  67. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    From what i can see, the maps are way too open. the game is way too fast now. bonus there is minimal server lag, which is a plus over black ops. it feels like the only strategy in this game is to camp due to ill thought out maps. cod 4 and world at war are my favorite call of duties, this is way too zippy. graphics are better than bf3, but bf3 feels more strategic and fun - weird as notFrom what i can see, the maps are way too open. the game is way too fast now. bonus there is minimal server lag, which is a plus over black ops. it feels like the only strategy in this game is to camp due to ill thought out maps. cod 4 and world at war are my favorite call of duties, this is way too zippy. graphics are better than bf3, but bf3 feels more strategic and fun - weird as not massive fan of bad company 2. Expand
  68. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    First things first; MW3 is a good game, and I would typically rate it as a package at 7.5, but I am giving it a 6 just to balance all of the COD fans giving it a 10 "stamp" as a result of Glen Schofield asking for a "Fair" rating. I thought the set pieces and story itself was entertaining and fun but the game play itself just feels a little hollow, physics, explosions,enemy spawns,First things first; MW3 is a good game, and I would typically rate it as a package at 7.5, but I am giving it a 6 just to balance all of the COD fans giving it a 10 "stamp" as a result of Glen Schofield asking for a "Fair" rating. I thought the set pieces and story itself was entertaining and fun but the game play itself just feels a little hollow, physics, explosions,enemy spawns, graphics, gun play all lack the impact of similar games in the genre. while other games innovate and improve MW3 hasn't kept up with current gen expectations, and seem satisfied with giving us more of the same. Same graphics, same game play, same MP, same everything. I think low Metacritic scores are a result of gamers frustrations, and should be taken as an opportunity to get in touch with the reality of the current game market. People just don't have a lot of extra money laying around for games that are marketed as the next big thing but are just cash in attempts. It makes people upset when they feel like they have been taken advantage of. . its time to wake up and hear the gaming public, or become the next formerly successful franchise. Expand
  69. Nov 12, 2011
    5
    This game is simply more of the same. Don't get me wrong, there were some good add ons such as weapon upgrades, etc. But it doesn't make up for the terrible hit detection-lag related bs! The maps are poorly designed as well. I'm so happy I spent $110 bucks on this game. Choke on my money Activision/Sledghammer. Btw, I want a refund for all the days I couldn't and still can't log into Elite.
  70. Nov 12, 2011
    6
    The amount of fan boys here suck. Both CoD and BF3. straight up game is the same as MW2. Just better graphics but really not too much. And a richer exp. Outside of multiplayer.
  71. Nov 13, 2011
    5
    Capturing all the fun that people used to have on Modern Warfare 2 but unfortunately captivating fan boys and gun nut idiots and leaving the same periods of rage from playing online. Good but copy and paste is not a good design Direction. Innovate.
  72. Nov 14, 2011
    6
    Multiplayer only impressions. Positives - good quantity of maps (16), noob tubing no longer an issue, shotguns now primary weapons, no ridiculously overpowered weapons (as was the case with the M16 in MW1), smooth 60fps, fewer cheap claymore deaths, interesting having to choose between the different strike packages, killstreak bonuses seem less overpowered vs MW2. Negatives - Sub-HD 600pMultiplayer only impressions. Positives - good quantity of maps (16), noob tubing no longer an issue, shotguns now primary weapons, no ridiculously overpowered weapons (as was the case with the M16 in MW1), smooth 60fps, fewer cheap claymore deaths, interesting having to choose between the different strike packages, killstreak bonuses seem less overpowered vs MW2. Negatives - Sub-HD 600p graphics look very muddy and dated, you can't move 5 feet without getting shot in the back (encourages camping in corners), often spawned extremely close to enemy, no option to set sensitivity of aiming down sight separately from look sensitivity, at £40 the Elite service should be included to compensate for the game being so similar to previous titles, silly that a sniper can beat you from 5m when you have a reflex sight and he/she has a x12 zoom scope, no dedicated servers, every map feels the same - filled with alleyways, cramped, no big open maps to mix things up. Expand
  73. Nov 21, 2011
    7
    I would consider myself a call of duty fan. I played COD4, MW2, Black Ops, and this. After spending 12 playing the multiplayer, spec ops, and five hour campaign, this is the review it deserves. With repetitive, boring campaign with obvious, desperate, and pathetic attempts to make you involved, to a disappointing set of spec ops missions, to a same old multiplayer, this game earns myI would consider myself a call of duty fan. I played COD4, MW2, Black Ops, and this. After spending 12 playing the multiplayer, spec ops, and five hour campaign, this is the review it deserves. With repetitive, boring campaign with obvious, desperate, and pathetic attempts to make you involved, to a disappointing set of spec ops missions, to a same old multiplayer, this game earns my title of worst COD game I have ever played.

    The campaign. Easily the worst campaign in the series, MW3 attempts to provide you with dozens of block buster sequences to pull you into the excitement of the concluding story of the modern warfare franchise. On paper that sounds fine, but it suffers from one rule, the cookie jar rule. Cookies aren't as tasty when you can have them all the time, rather than when you mommy limits them daily. The block buster scenes become repetitive, and leave a bad taste in you mouth after your done. Not to mention the laughable and pathetic attempts to make you emotionally involved at scenes when innocent civilians died. And no, I'm not one of those people who thought the airplane scene was disgusting. Neither is this, but this one is just pathetic (you know what I'm talking about if you've played the campaign). In MW2, I adored spec ops. It was possibly my favorite thing in that entire game, but this game, disappointing. The missions saddened me. They were boring, and paled in comparison to the MW2 spec ops missions. I honestly wish I never touched them. Survival mode. While survival mode is the only fresh thing in this series, which is ironic because it has still been done by other games, I feel it is going to be forgotten. It is fun now, but after playing, I believe that by February, the game mode will be forgotten. It is not nearly as fun and addicting as Nazi zombies, primarily because of the steep difficulty slope. As the rounds progress, the enemies don't necessarily take more skill to kill, it just becomes literally impossible to kill them. The strategy in this game mode is minimal. It's hard to explain, but when you go on to that level 30, you say to your buddy, okay, we are going to die here, we almost died last round, we have no chance. That is not fun. It also lacks "breathing room." By that I mean the thing in zombies when you have one zombie chase you around till your ready or you have to go to the bathroom or you have to eat dinner or something, this game doesn't provide that. The 30 second interval isn't enough time to feel good about that new highest round you got to, or to just relax after an intense fire fight. The Multiplayer. What can I say, its MW2 multiplayer. If you want the same game, but without the SAME problems, this is your haven, but notice how I said the SAME problems. First off, the maps. Boring environments and repetitive styles make the MW3 maps are some of the worst in the series. There are no really good maps. There are only okay maps, and bad maps. They chose one style of map, and stuck with it, resulting in them all being very similar, just with different set pieces. The guns. The gun sounds in this game are hands down the best in the series. Every bullet feels like it is making an impact on your opponent, and every gun but one feels powerful in your hands. The killstreaks. The killstreaks are well balanced, but that is ruined by the sheer abundance of them. It is far easier to earn one in this game than any COD previous to this one.

    Overall. The graphics are showing its age leading to boring and unimpressive visuals. The engine is as silky smooth as ever, running at a 60 frames per second, which on PC is disappointing, but on console is fantastic. It gives that ol' MW2 feeling again. Gameplay is same as MW2, so don't expect anything different.

    Campaign: 5
    Spec Ops Missions: 3
    Survival: 8
    Multiplayer: 7
    Graphics: 7
    Gameplay: 8
    Overall: 7
    Expand
  74. Mar 6, 2012
    7
    I love COD yet I honestly find MW3 is just disappointing. While it doesn't deserve an F, it never reaches the heights of MW3. The campaign, while intense, is just full of cliches and plotholes that make no sense. If the Russian president is traveling over for a peace treaty, who gave the order for Russia to invade Europe? Also what's the point of showing a child die? War is bad? That'sI love COD yet I honestly find MW3 is just disappointing. While it doesn't deserve an F, it never reaches the heights of MW3. The campaign, while intense, is just full of cliches and plotholes that make no sense. If the Russian president is traveling over for a peace treaty, who gave the order for Russia to invade Europe? Also what's the point of showing a child die? War is bad? That's already been expressed a billion times and it doesn't further the plot unlike the nuke and massacre in MW1 & 2. Given the new standards in storytelling set by shooters like Blops and Bioshock, COD should provide both a good story AND good shooting gameplay. The multiplayer feels a bit better and has an interesting pointstreak system yet it's a bit stifled as there's no match making for gun games and infection mode. Also the Juggernaut pointstreaks are too powerful because they have both regenerative health AND near-impenetrable bull**** armor. The Treyarch's creative run-and-gun zombies mode is replaced with a boring cover-based survival mode. Listen devs, the reason why zombies was well loved because it was a refreshing change of pace that offered some old-school fun reminiscent of that of Painkiller. It's not horrible, but if feels like the lazy combo of multiplayer gameplay and maps with single player enemies. The environments appear as if smothered in a grayish wallpaper paste vomit and the original dev team and Hans Zimmer are all gone. This game is more obligation than inspiration. If it were a $30 expansion pack, I would've tolerated it, but MW3 is just underwhelming. It's like RE5, the game I love is in here, but its creative spark is gone and it's not amazing. Expand
  75. Apr 29, 2012
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Modern Warfare 3 is not even a new game. But, the controls and movements of the solid, not straying away from previous titles. The campaign was the biggest let down for me personally by not having more large epic battles other than the levels based in New York City. The Spec Ops mode was basically the same as Modern Warfare 2's, just with different environments. Multiplayer is almost exactly the same from previous titles, just that there are some new kill streaks, new guns, and new maps. Also, the graphics appear to be of the same quality of the previous titles Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops. The most satisfying thing I took from the game was having Captain Price finally bring Makarov to justice. Overall, it's a good game, but the lack of innovation is just irritating. Expand
  76. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    First i do appreciate the efforts made listening to the community ie: noob tubes, commando, etc. However there are areas where i feel the game developers decided to implement 100% change instead of just giving us a taste...MAPS. I actually enjoy this game so much, except for these maps. MW2 arguably has the best maps of the series collectively. How u can fall flat on ur face like this isFirst i do appreciate the efforts made listening to the community ie: noob tubes, commando, etc. However there are areas where i feel the game developers decided to implement 100% change instead of just giving us a taste...MAPS. I actually enjoy this game so much, except for these maps. MW2 arguably has the best maps of the series collectively. How u can fall flat on ur face like this is alarming. I hold out a lil hope that there will be at least a map pack that includes mw2 maps, which were quite fun to play. I dont know if it is because of the infancy of the game or what but the connection issues are disturbing and really disappointing. Again, MW2 seemed to be so smooth compared to these last two. If this game-play could have been added to the MW2 maps and servers/matchmaking/etc i think it would have been a home run, however we are left a lil disappointed once again. I guess we can hold out hope for maps like Scrapyard, Highrise, Skidrow, Afghan, Sub Base, Terminal, Derail, Karachi...but who knows. Expand
  77. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    I am extremely disappointed with the new MW3, did everyone that made the first 2 good jump ship? I was really excited to pick this up, that wore off after a couple of hours with it. The maps seem ridiculously cluttered and small, and they all feel the exact same. I was really hoping for some fun open maps like wasteland or underpass, even some of the maps from Black Ops were better. II am extremely disappointed with the new MW3, did everyone that made the first 2 good jump ship? I was really excited to pick this up, that wore off after a couple of hours with it. The maps seem ridiculously cluttered and small, and they all feel the exact same. I was really hoping for some fun open maps like wasteland or underpass, even some of the maps from Black Ops were better. I am very disappointed, only pick up if you have nothing else to play this year! Expand
  78. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    Sorry for the long post, but it is worth the read :) I would like to chime in my personal opinion and also what I think many people are seemingly overlooking. MW3 is lacking in a couple areas that make this game not even enjoyable for me. The problems for me are the overall pace of the multiplayer experience, the layout of the maps, and the idea that adding more non essential filler to theSorry for the long post, but it is worth the read :) I would like to chime in my personal opinion and also what I think many people are seemingly overlooking. MW3 is lacking in a couple areas that make this game not even enjoyable for me. The problems for me are the overall pace of the multiplayer experience, the layout of the maps, and the idea that adding more non essential filler to the multiplayer experience.

    Over the last couple of days I have had no good or special feeling about any one of the multiplayer maps over another one. It is shocking to me that all the maps seem to be uninteresting at best. I challenge you to go through the maps and compare them against the COD4 map set. You will be astonished, no doubt, that COD4 offers a much more distinct feeling to each map. Each one feels fun and the combat flows differently in each map. I made sure this was not just a feeling of nostalgia by going back and reviewing each map and even playing COD4. MW3 maps all seem to be almost forcing some sort of "meta" which some have said kills sniper or long range play. I agree for the most part, there is no epic sense of a level, they feel all the same cluttered mess of non interesting set pieces. Ever since COD4 (which I still believe was the top of the franchise to date) map levels and layouts have gone downhill.

    The pace of the maps (what I consider to be a result of bad spawning and map layout) is even higher than that of MW2. Yes, some may love this run and gun, turning corners, firing from the hip, and quick scoping. I don't mind this play in any sense. It is the fact that you do not have the option of diverting from this forced game play other than camping. This I feel will calm down as we get to be more familiar with maps and the spawns, yet judging and looking to the future based of the maps and my experience so far, I see it being an issue, even if a fraction of what it is currently. Think about COD4, W@W, or even MW2 to a degree. Many, even a majority, of the maps had a distinct layout to them that suggested key points, buildings, or start points. Like in paintball, or most competitive events, you know what you are going against and how to set up strategies to be successful. I feel, and this is my opinion, that every where you go, there is a corner or something blocking you forward progression, in order to force CQC. Almost every area has more than one flanking route. Add this on top of small and/or cluttered maps with crazy spawn mechanics, well you get the picture.

    Ok, this last issue is more of a rant and not a game breaker to me. Never the less I will address my opinion on it. Every COD that comes out is almost entirely focused on being "crazier" than the last. Look at the progression of kills and customization that has ensued since the game breaking COD4. It started with the set kill streaks, and guns that unlocked. Now it is at three sets of customized kill streaks going 15+ on kill streaks, with so many ways to level up etc. Many point this out as the reason for it being justified as a new experience worthy of the retail box+price. In my humble and honest opinion, I don't care about nonsense like this. I loved COD4 for the epic team battles, diverse levels, and over sense of excitement. Yes kill streaks were part of that equation, but they were not any way the meat and potatoes of it. I feel like they add and add but forgot where they came from in this endeavor. My opinion.

    All in all, this is why I feel like MW3 is a letdown to say the very least. More so, I feel it deserves a 7.5 at the best, although realistically I would give it a 6. Being, not only is it nothing new, but I feel (emphasis on my opinion) that it has brought it self down an extra notch for trying to force maps and dump endless customization as compensation for lack of innovation. I will still play it and enjoy it for what it IS. I will give it a couple weeks for it to set in, but this is the first game in the series that has cause me so much disappointment to actually post online. :) If my experience goes on like it is currently, then I will go back to a prior COD game, hence the 6.

    My credentials as a gamer: Played since pre-Nintendo. FPS shooters include but not limited to Golden Eye, All COD series owned and played. Played BF since 1942, Had epic COD 2 and 3 and Halo LAN Matches at my house. Love CS, team fortress, DoD, and many other HL mods. Played Planet Side since launch. Original Op Flashpoint and AA. Plus more :) Thanks for the read, feel free to hate on me or comment :) Plus I am married and have a Financial bachelors degree from Indiana University.
    Expand
  79. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    My biggest issue with this game is that the multi player maps are awful. They are all small, close quarters maps with too many entry/exit routes and disrupted lines of sight. Looking back at the MW2 and COD4 maps they were mostly all classic maps offering a variety of gameplay where you could either keep to the indoor rooms and corridors with a shotgun or SMG or plot up on a balcony with aMy biggest issue with this game is that the multi player maps are awful. They are all small, close quarters maps with too many entry/exit routes and disrupted lines of sight. Looking back at the MW2 and COD4 maps they were mostly all classic maps offering a variety of gameplay where you could either keep to the indoor rooms and corridors with a shotgun or SMG or plot up on a balcony with a sniper rifle and a claymore, there would only be a couple maps in each game that no one liked and each one had its own character. I'll give this game a 6 because it still basically has the same gameplay mechanics that made COD4 the near perfect game that it was but it is not higher due to the fact that COD4, MW2 and BF3 do exist and we were all hoping for the stakes to be raised. Expand
  80. Nov 12, 2011
    5
    Overrated as a retail release.
    Would be rated higher as an expansion pack or dlc.
    It does what it does well, if you like a no brains approach to shooters than this game does very well. All of the campaign missions have a 'follow me' design to them , even the stealth missions do not let you diverge from your 'follow me' leader, who strings you along every mission in some form or another.
    Overrated as a retail release.
    Would be rated higher as an expansion pack or dlc.

    It does what it does well, if you like a no brains approach to shooters than this game does very well.
    All of the campaign missions have a 'follow me' design to them , even the stealth missions do not let you diverge from your 'follow me' leader, who strings you along every mission in some form or another.

    MP , pretty much the same thing as cod4,waw,black ops, mw2 etc.
    Kill confirmed and spec ops do add some new features and they're exciting to play, but overall I feel as if the entire game was mass fed to the general public all high like converts at a George Jones convention.

    It's as if a mass population of people have deceived themselves by drinking the tainted kool-aid.

    We've seen in history droves of people follow insane ideas without question.

    It's no surprise that a glorified expansion pack becomes the biggest selling entertainment item in history.

    History does indeed repeat itself.
    Expand
  81. Nov 14, 2011
    6
    Modern warfare 1 & 2 were some of my favorite CoD games. This one is ok. It feels very uninspired. Black ops was way better than this one. This game is a complete cash in. No updated engine or anything. uninspired maps and levels
  82. Nov 14, 2011
    6
    DrPlatypus Review (for the most part without bias.) Modern warfare 3 is by no means a terrible game. I used is dislike the game quite heavily before i actually tried it, when i did i certainly had fun. But after a few hours the game start to leave a mark on me that definitely was not what i felt in the first few minutes.

    The game features an incredible campaign, and i will leave it at
    DrPlatypus Review (for the most part without bias.) Modern warfare 3 is by no means a terrible game. I used is dislike the game quite heavily before i actually tried it, when i did i certainly had fun. But after a few hours the game start to leave a mark on me that definitely was not what i felt in the first few minutes.

    The game features an incredible campaign, and i will leave it at that. But the Multiplayer is where CoD gained its fame and it will be the multiplayer that leave an impression. Now to start Infinity Ward and Sledge Hammer have refined the Call of Duty experience, and it is actually a general improvement over Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops. The gun play is fantastic (Although damage could be nerved and hit detection still suffers) and the map design greatly favours close quarters fast paced combat, which for a general 6V6 game is a good thing. Despite some issues the guns remain balanced, more so then any CoD other than Cod 4. However it feels like they have taken killstreaks and done everything humanly possible to over blow them. In CoD 4 Modern Warfare the killsteaks were balanced and fun, but MW2 and Black ops made the killstreak annoying, and now Modern Warfare 3 has absolutely over blown them. The helicopters are overpowered in every sense, and the so called support package includes more offensive killsteaks than you could imagine. This is a bad thing, the effort to make things new has blown up, quite literally as almost every killsteak creates massive explosions.

    But if we hop back on the weapon side of the train Modern Warfare 3 does not disappoint with its new weapon ranking system. The new system makes every moment using your weapon rewarding as you are always looking for different and innovative ways to improve or have fun with it. In all honestly this feature alone raise Call of Duty modern warfare 3 from a 5 to a 6 in my opinion.

    Overall the fast paced and entertaining combat of Call of Duty the excellent gunplay and campaign would leave this game at an 8.5, but the horrendous mess of killstreaks and how they are opposed to the feeling of the game has almost ruined everything in my opinion, so sadly i must rate Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 a 6.
    Expand
  83. Nov 24, 2011
    6
    First of all i think all of the people that gave this a 0 you should be ashamed of yourselves, you are esentially saying this game is worse then Rogue Warrior i dont think so!!!!..... Ok the issues people seam to have with this game including myself is the fact it feels the same as COD 4 onwards but to be honest that is as much the consumers fault as the developers, we demand the nextFirst of all i think all of the people that gave this a 0 you should be ashamed of yourselves, you are esentially saying this game is worse then Rogue Warrior i dont think so!!!!..... Ok the issues people seam to have with this game including myself is the fact it feels the same as COD 4 onwards but to be honest that is as much the consumers fault as the developers, we demand the next instalment and we expect this to be delivered within 12 months of the last game. this does not leave much scope for any improvements to the engine or games mechanics, The game works and the story is good which is enough for a 6 in my opinion i was never a fan of the multiplayer but i have started to give it a try, will see how that goes... Final thaughts if you loved the other COD games you will enjoy this, but if you after a game that feels fresh and new look elsewere as its more of the same... Expand
  84. Nov 8, 2011
    5
    Wow i can't believe how much hate is being thrown around on here.MW3 is better then BF3 BF3 is better then MW3 who the **** cares?i am a gamer looking to have fun and enjoy my free time outside of work.But you all seem to miss the big picture.we are all being duped by higher prices with less content and now this elite thing is going to go threw the roof because its associated with the CODWow i can't believe how much hate is being thrown around on here.MW3 is better then BF3 BF3 is better then MW3 who the **** cares?i am a gamer looking to have fun and enjoy my free time outside of work.But you all seem to miss the big picture.we are all being duped by higher prices with less content and now this elite thing is going to go threw the roof because its associated with the COD franchise and it is really going to make all company's step back and take a look at there AAA titles and before to long its not only going to cost you $60 for the game but also MMO pricing for the MP or more story plots or what ever else big company can squeeze you for.And yet we all line up like sheep and say oh well its the next big thing let me bend over for you cause i don't want to miss out on any thing.I for one have played all of the call of duty's and medal of honors and BF's and i can tell you that none of them are worth getting all worked up over like this.I am insulted and disappointed for the first time in my life to be labeled as a gamer to know that that throws me into this mess of humanity.I have been playing BF3 since picking up a USED copy and will definitely be picking up a USED copy of this game as well as i don't believe that either company cares enough about the gaming community or gamers themselves to justify my $60 purchase.I am rating both games a 5 cause that's apparently the only way to not be labeled a fan boy of either. Expand
  85. Nov 9, 2011
    6
    Fans of the series will enjoy it but you'd be better off buying a used copy. *** SINGLE PLAYER: This final episode brings the story to a conclusion that will leave most satisfied and does it with flare and style in an enjoyable manner. *** SPEC OPS: If you have the friends to play with, these will keep you engaged for quite some time. *** MULTIPLAYER: Subtle changes that continue theFans of the series will enjoy it but you'd be better off buying a used copy. *** SINGLE PLAYER: This final episode brings the story to a conclusion that will leave most satisfied and does it with flare and style in an enjoyable manner. *** SPEC OPS: If you have the friends to play with, these will keep you engaged for quite some time. *** MULTIPLAYER: Subtle changes that continue the tradition started with previous titles and simple refine what has existed for many years. *** PERFORMANCE: Graphics and sound are both sub-par compared to other titles that have come out this year and the IW engine is showing its age. The guns are the same as previously and do not handle well nor sound as one might hope and animations are clunky. It's time for the Call of Duty team to step up and move beyond their existing technology. Performance is snappy and only trivial bugs were encountered. *** FINAL THOUGHTS: Every die hard first person shooter fan will likely find something in this game that they will enjoy though if you were already growing tired of the other games in the series, this one won't offer anything new or exciting. If you value and desire team work, look elsewhere. If you're on the fence, wait and buy it once the price comes down or pick up a used copy. *** NOTES: Elite was not tested and is not included in this review as the servers were unavailable due to overloading. Expand
  86. Nov 9, 2011
    5
    Another yr goes by and another call of duty. More like childrens online daycare (cod). Its amazing all the so called pro reviewers praise this game like its the second coming of christ or something. Glad i dont go to there church. Those huge advertising dollars bring in good reviews i guess. I played mw, mw2 passed blackops and picked this up. Well it feels like the same old song andAnother yr goes by and another call of duty. More like childrens online daycare (cod). Its amazing all the so called pro reviewers praise this game like its the second coming of christ or something. Glad i dont go to there church. Those huge advertising dollars bring in good reviews i guess. I played mw, mw2 passed blackops and picked this up. Well it feels like the same old song and dance. Im sure there are some differences or so called improvements from mw and mw2 but since i havnt played either in a long time I couldnt tell ya what they were, seems the same to me. I really wanted something to stand out and blow me away but it didnt happen. I liked the singleplayer as short as it was. Nothing memorable but short and painless to say the least. Multiplayer, same crap peer to peer, host with the most networking as before. Same gameplay from what i feel just tighter maps and a refined perk system. Really I think im done with cod, definately selling this game once skyrim releases. Expand
  87. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    MW3 it isnt a bad game it just isn't that good. this is. it brings the same old thing to the table with nothing new. this is just playing a little to safe. its running on an outdated engine that's being beaten by almost every other game out. sure they make money since they do yearly releases. but repacking old games and marketing them as new with only minor changes is just way to cheap. ifMW3 it isnt a bad game it just isn't that good. this is. it brings the same old thing to the table with nothing new. this is just playing a little to safe. its running on an outdated engine that's being beaten by almost every other game out. sure they make money since they do yearly releases. but repacking old games and marketing them as new with only minor changes is just way to cheap. if they had put more effort into MW3 it would be good. if they put more effort into the CoD series it wont die out.

    all in all MW# is a safe bet in a solidly built game. it doesn't bring any imagination or innovation with it. maps are almost repacked and reused just some differences. the storyline for the campaign is good but it s just that. multiplayer is the same old stuff nothing new nothing that grabs you and holds you to the game.
    Expand
  88. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    I'm going to be honest.

    There are some people who can be jaded to something that is popular for the reason that it is, well, popular. CoD would be an example, but do the jaded people have good reasons to be jaded? Well, yes, everything has an opinion of something. I've heard that people have been slandering this user review page (BF3 fanboys, apparently) and i decided to weight
    I'm going to be honest.

    There are some people who can be jaded to something that is popular for the reason that it is, well, popular.

    CoD would be an example, but do the jaded people have good reasons to be jaded?

    Well, yes, everything has an opinion of something.

    I've heard that people have been slandering this user review page (BF3 fanboys, apparently) and i decided to weight my opinion on stuff related and not related to the game.

    This is a game that is supposed to be a depiction of war, and for all it does, it does a good job capturing that 'war' feeling with the brown and bloom and the shooting, but something feels empty. i'm sure people have said this, but the game plays through scripted sequences and sometimes feels like you're playing an interactive movie rather than a video game, and i would happen to agree.

    some would say "that's just good directing" but if the goal of the game is to capture the essence of war, why does it feel like every mission is just some objective that has no point other to progress a typical war story?

    if the game's goal was to immerse ourselves and feel tension from playing the game, it did it all wrong. i felt some emotion at some parts, but nothing that made a lasting impact, the story was dry and was far too 'micheal bay esque' to please me.

    The story has set difficulties to play on, but feels too casualized to make me want to care, i played veteran and there were far too many re-spawn points and many times i felt like there wasn't a challenge because of this not to mention the level design isn't exactly via scripted sequences and linear paths.

    the sound is alright, a mention to the whole "WAR IS BAD" theme there is gun-fire and everybody yelling and things explode, there isn't much else as far the soundtrack goes, some orchestrated themes, a guitar lick or two, and that's the soundtrack.

    of course, these games never did have a emphasis on soundtracks.

    The gameplay as mentioned is very simple, you shoot bad guys, they die, america is the best.

    i suppose i can say that the controls are responsive for playing with a controller.

    well, i suppose there is more to it but the objective is basically that, it's not a very hard game to pick up and play, even on higher difficulties as mentioned.

    multiplayer is the same thing, quite literally. there was no change to the multiplayer beside some kill-streak changes and some new guns and whatnot.

    i enjoy the multiplayer and i could find it fun if i didn't have some rampant 13 year old screaming in my ear or some teenager saying **** everytime he gets shot in the face.

    this is where i just can't seem to enjoy CoD, the fan-base is just awful and i either have to mute my microphone and everyone else and try to enjoy a game hoping that i won't get called out or get hate-mail because everyone is a whiny ****

    it saddens me, i like CoD, but it just doesn't have polish, it doesn't do anything new, and it fails to deliver from a perspective of people who were looking for something else besides a re-skin.

    to put it simple: if you like CoD, you'll like this one, if you don't, pass it up and let this fad bury itself into the ground much like any other Activision game.
    Expand
  89. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    Meet the new boss... same as the old boss. Mw3 improves on its predecessors but lacks any true innovation besides the kill streaks which in my opinion are the only fun factor. After all the game is designed to make kill streaks the ultimate reward and the new system helps noobs out because its now easier to get them. I played a lot of Halo and for a long time i thought there could not beMeet the new boss... same as the old boss. Mw3 improves on its predecessors but lacks any true innovation besides the kill streaks which in my opinion are the only fun factor. After all the game is designed to make kill streaks the ultimate reward and the new system helps noobs out because its now easier to get them. I played a lot of Halo and for a long time i thought there could not be any better and fun way to play FPS. Then Cod 4 came out and i realized there was. Problem is that 3 games after cod 4 i started to get bored. I mean think about it, imagine having played reach with the halo 2 engine. Well thatâ Expand
  90. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    The game is solid and playable, and that's why it saved itself from a zero. But what gets it a 5 is that fact the game hasn't brought anything new to the table. How can the supposed "Most Anticipated Game in History" not do anything... relatively new? The engine is the same, the graphics are the same, same lackluster (trying to be blockbuster) single player, but wait! The multiplayer isThe game is solid and playable, and that's why it saved itself from a zero. But what gets it a 5 is that fact the game hasn't brought anything new to the table. How can the supposed "Most Anticipated Game in History" not do anything... relatively new? The engine is the same, the graphics are the same, same lackluster (trying to be blockbuster) single player, but wait! The multiplayer is kinda different-ish. Take a look at some of the critics' reviews, and a lot of them take notice of this as well. But strangely, they still give the game an amazing score... very strange. In my opinion, this should have been released as an expansion pack, mainly because the game only switches up the gameplay by a little bit by fixing balancing issues and a revamped killstreak point system in hopes of inspiring some sort of cohesive teamwork and combating the plagues of air support mowing down any poor soul that steps into the open. Oh, and throw in a couple of new maps (which supposedly include old models recycled from the first Modern Warfare). Only then, I would I be willing to give my money to an obviously hungry Activision. I just wish they spent more time on going above and beyond with this franchise, aka not pumping out a game every year. But the game is a crowd favorite (and remember, just because everyone loves it, doesn't mean it's always good!) and a huge cash cow, so in the eyes of Activision working less on it and still selling millions is the best situation they could ask for. But I guess they haven't learned jack **** about over-saturating the market! Just think, when was the last time you've seen a new Guitar Hero or Tony Hawk game on the shelves? Yea... that's what I thought. I'm just glad I rented this. Expand
  91. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    We've all seen sequels that go too far for innovation and spoil the original game-play. MW3 is NOT one of those games. If anything, MW3 will be remembered for how much it DIDN'T change. I have thought to myself "but wait... I've already played this game" more than once.

    Like another reviewer said, the campaign plays like it was written by Michael Bay's evil twin. Full of huge explosions
    We've all seen sequels that go too far for innovation and spoil the original game-play. MW3 is NOT one of those games. If anything, MW3 will be remembered for how much it DIDN'T change. I have thought to myself "but wait... I've already played this game" more than once.

    Like another reviewer said, the campaign plays like it was written by Michael Bay's evil twin. Full of huge explosions and silly reasoning that fills in for plot. The campaign is entertaining, but it's like candy. Have too much in one sitting and you'll get sick. The campaign is also very short, which is fine with me since it's full to the brim with HOLY SH!T moments.

    MP is a direct continuation of the CoD formula with it's usual flaws and infrequent high points. Bullet lag is still a major problem. Too many times have I shot a player 3-4 times, watch the Kill-cam and see that 0 shots registered. Since I have already played my fair share (and gotten bored) of CoD online, there isn't much bringing me back game-play wise... which leads me to my last point:

    MAPS. So far they have been pretty frustrating. Most of the old CoD maps had a nice directional feeling to them. Your team fought toward the other team, usually ending up with the teams pushing back and forth across the map. Not so much now. Most encounters are random, 1v1 surprise moments in the maze of corridors and small rooms where the player with the better connection wins.
    Expand
  92. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    I'm struggling with this review. I think its mostly because I want so badly to give a better review but simply cannot. I am a fan of the new maps although, camping does seem to be a major factor in the development which is really disappointing for a game classified as "hand to hand combat" or in other words run and gun. With so many dark corners and small windows this installment is yetI'm struggling with this review. I think its mostly because I want so badly to give a better review but simply cannot. I am a fan of the new maps although, camping does seem to be a major factor in the development which is really disappointing for a game classified as "hand to hand combat" or in other words run and gun. With so many dark corners and small windows this installment is yet again another noob tube/campers/snipers dream land. For me the multiplayer has not taken any steps forward. Black ops (although Treyarch is generally hated on by Ward followers) is a far superior game. They hit it home with allowing for claymores, tac inserts, ect as a third button and not having to replace your grenades. However, the most dissapointing part of this game for me is the perks. They have not been changed much from MW2 which was one of the biggest complaints about MW2. Major problems with the arrangment in the 3 slots as well as the pros not really having to do much with that perk at all. Example: Slight of hand pro = change weapons faster? While needing to use a whole other perk to gain faster aiming down the sights. What about marathon? Their is no long even an option for unlimited sprint in a game that is suppose to get back to gun to gun combat. Sure they have extreme conditioning which allows a minimal added time for spint but its in the same slot as 2 other important perks. How about having to use 2 perk slots to accomplish what black ops did with ghost pro. I could rattle on and on about how much better black ops and even MW2 is than this game but in the end I'm truly dissappointed with how much this game has evolved from first person shooters skills to hiding in a corner or by a window and shooting a noob tube toward the area of an enemy or shooting them in the back. The only reason I still rate this game with a 6 is because I do truly enjoy the new map packs for MW2 however not worth $60 and waiting in line at midnight for the release. Expand
  93. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    Mw3 is a step backwards in the series. The mp in its current state is terrible. The maps are terriblly cramped and boring, you cant step two feet with out bumping into someone. Spawn points leave you right next to the enemy to get killed again. Point Steak system is unbalanced, making it to easy to have air support all the time. But glaringly bad is the lag compensation system, making theMw3 is a step backwards in the series. The mp in its current state is terrible. The maps are terriblly cramped and boring, you cant step two feet with out bumping into someone. Spawn points leave you right next to the enemy to get killed again. Point Steak system is unbalanced, making it to easy to have air support all the time. But glaringly bad is the lag compensation system, making the game unplayable. You get killed by magic bullets out of nowhere only for the killcam to show the enemy shooting you a full second before you even see them on your screen. Expand
  94. Nov 11, 2011
    7
    The game was great,but the similarities to the previous MW games is enormous. The low 50 dollar price is great,but unless you like Cod's story line and multiplayer this is a very good game. The story line is so generic of an FPS,I really didn't like it. I just did it for the achievements,and the fun multiplayer. The best IW and Sledgehammer could do is change the HUD,like Black Ops,orThe game was great,but the similarities to the previous MW games is enormous. The low 50 dollar price is great,but unless you like Cod's story line and multiplayer this is a very good game. The story line is so generic of an FPS,I really didn't like it. I just did it for the achievements,and the fun multiplayer. The best IW and Sledgehammer could do is change the HUD,like Black Ops,or prevent the hacked lobbies. It is too early to determine to when the Hacked Lobbies may strike,but the graphics and the HUD are almost the same. In the end,it is a great game. Expand
  95. Nov 11, 2011
    5
    Well, well, well. It's another year and here we have another COD game. Also want to welcome back Infinity Ward and what is left of their staff after all those "creative guys" left to form their own studio. Thanks, Activision. You rule. Well, here is how it goes. The campaign is more of the same. You play multiple characters as you make your way through a story of what can only beWell, well, well. It's another year and here we have another COD game. Also want to welcome back Infinity Ward and what is left of their staff after all those "creative guys" left to form their own studio. Thanks, Activision. You rule. Well, here is how it goes. The campaign is more of the same. You play multiple characters as you make your way through a story of what can only be described as "sensory overload" of having to move from point A to point B while shooting pockets of seemingly endless spawning bad guys. Long story short, I got the feeling of been there, done that. Even de ja' vu at times. Story won't blow your mind; however, it does do it's best to tie up loose ends in this trilogy. If you loved the previous two games, you will like this. Can be a little "samey, samey". You know, like Michael Cera's movie characters. Seen him in one movie and that is what you can expect in every single movie you will ever see him in. The multiplayer is more of the same, as well. If you like the previous games, you will like this one; but, may experience some burnout if you were on your way there in previous installments. At this point, I am digging it; but, I will see how many more "Michael Cera characters" I can stomach before it becomes just annoying. Expand
  96. Nov 11, 2011
    7
    Single player campaign has been fun. I think they did a real nice job. The learning curve (online) to be successful on this edition of COD is steeper than BLOPS. Kill Confirmed is fun new gametype. Hit detection doesn't seem as good as MW2, probably closer to Black Ops. If you are a COD fan, you already own this game. If you aren't a huge fan, I believe Black Ops (with Zombies included) isSingle player campaign has been fun. I think they did a real nice job. The learning curve (online) to be successful on this edition of COD is steeper than BLOPS. Kill Confirmed is fun new gametype. Hit detection doesn't seem as good as MW2, probably closer to Black Ops. If you are a COD fan, you already own this game. If you aren't a huge fan, I believe Black Ops (with Zombies included) is a better value. Expand
  97. Nov 11, 2011
    5
    ahh why critics why did you give this game so much positive feed back the only things they did was add a map pack in the multiplayer added some tweaks to guns and killstreaks. The story line yes the game is good for the story line is good and have some memorable moments but overall its just the same game as modern warfare 2. Over all the game is a meh for me.
  98. Nov 11, 2011
    5
    First, I would like to say that I had this game on pre-order for some time and have owned ALL of the COD games on the XBOX360. I can truly say, as a fan of the COD series, I am disappointed with MW3. Yes it had the elements that I enjoyed from MW2, but to me it seemed more like an add-on than a new game. All in all, it is more of the same and if you liked MW2 then you will like MW3. IfFirst, I would like to say that I had this game on pre-order for some time and have owned ALL of the COD games on the XBOX360. I can truly say, as a fan of the COD series, I am disappointed with MW3. Yes it had the elements that I enjoyed from MW2, but to me it seemed more like an add-on than a new game. All in all, it is more of the same and if you liked MW2 then you will like MW3. If you are looking for something different, like most of us were, then save your money. Expand
  99. Nov 11, 2011
    7
    There is no denying the hype placed on this game has been extravagant â
  100. Nov 14, 2011
    5
    When news broke out about the whole Infinity Ward / Activision fallout over the firing of Vince Zampella and Jason West, I became very skeptical about the future of Modern Warfare 3. After playing through the campaign on Veteran and giving the online multiplayer a week of play, I must report that the skepticism was well deserved. This is by far the easiest COD I have played on VeteranWhen news broke out about the whole Infinity Ward / Activision fallout over the firing of Vince Zampella and Jason West, I became very skeptical about the future of Modern Warfare 3. After playing through the campaign on Veteran and giving the online multiplayer a week of play, I must report that the skepticism was well deserved. This is by far the easiest COD I have played on Veteran difficulty, taking a mere 6 hours to complete from beginning to end, and feels more like an interactive roller coaster ride than anything else, shooting popup targets as you go.
    Multiplayer is where longevity comes into play for an FPS, and to be perfectly blunt, this is what I was most pissed off about. The fun to be had in multiplayer is evident, but the feeling that you were ripped off soon sinks in when you realize this is pretty much the same game we were playing 2 years ago with a new paint job. The new killstreaks aren't as enjoyable to play around with, all the "new" perks and weapons are just retweaks of existing COD staples (even the deathstreaks and weapon perks are just conditional perks mostly from older games). Compounding the distaste is the horrible map designs and spawn locations. The game launched with over 10 maps to play with, but the fact that most of the maps are similar in confinement and lack any real creativity is a shame.
    Weapon imbalances are abound, which will hopefully be rectified via patches ala BlackOps. Some weapons such as shotguns and some smg and AR's are completely outclassed in everyway by others.

    Gone are all the stats menus that came in-game with BlackOps, instead you are relegated to using Call of Duty Elite, an app for your XBox that employs clan connectivity and allows you to see in-depth stats, and of course if you want the real meat and potatoes for this app you need to pay an annual fee. The new highlight of the multiplayer is Kill Confirmed, a mode of deathmatch that tries to discourage camping by forcing players to gather tags off downed enemies in order to score. The only problem is that it actually employs camping as well, as many individuals will use the tags as bait. This is not a problem of the game itself, but the community at large who wish increase their personal kill to death ratio than actually contribute to a winning game. In conclusion, I would have felt much more comfortable paying $40 for what feels more like an expansion pack than full-fledged new game, but at the current $60 retail value you are paying too much. And considering the fact that Activision will be releasing maps packs often for this game, over the course of the year you are looking to spend atleast $90 for this game alone, even more if you are a subscriber to the COD Elite service.
    Expand
  101. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    Reviews of this game on Metacritic are HORRIBLY biased from a fanboy point of view. Being a fan of all first person shooter games, I feel that I am eligible to post to valid review of the game.

    Campaign: The campaign is fantastic. It meets all expectations of the game, and more. The story is very refreshed and is NOT a 'rehash' of other games in the series. 10/10. Multiplayer: I do not
    Reviews of this game on Metacritic are HORRIBLY biased from a fanboy point of view. Being a fan of all first person shooter games, I feel that I am eligible to post to valid review of the game.

    Campaign:

    The campaign is fantastic. It meets all expectations of the game, and more. The story is very refreshed and is NOT a 'rehash' of other games in the series. 10/10.

    Multiplayer:

    I do not feel I can review the Multiplayer as of yet as I have not played it enough. Expect a further review of the multiplayer on a later date.

    Engine/Graphics: Although the engine and graphics of this game do not meet those of a certain competitor in the FPS genre, they are still much better than some on the market, and again, are no where near as bad as have been suggested. Although it is disappointing that the graphics could not be improved, the engine is still better (in my eyes) than the same certain competitor. This is because of the very nice, crisp sound that is a huge improvement over both IW 4.0 and Black Ops' varient 3.0. 8/10

    Gameplay:

    Now this is where I believe the game REALLY stands out. The gameplay of Call of Duty, especially this installment (which has gone back to the trademark gameplay of COD4) is usually fantastic. The AI is well polished and MUCH better than a certain competitor on the market and you actually become attached to the characters that you play as. 10/10

    Overall, I give the game 9.5/10, which I will round to 10/10 in order to combat the obviously fanboy-esque reviews of the game.

    If you want to verify that I am not a 'fanboy' myself, please see my other reviews of both Call of Duty and Battlefield installments. This game DOES NOT deserve 2.8 (at this time of writing), and you if you've played it you know that.
    Collapse
Metascore
88

Generally favorable reviews - based on 81 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 79 out of 81
  2. Negative: 0 out of 81
  1. Jan 11, 2012
    85
    Ultimately, Modern Warfare 3 feels similar to it's brethren, but that doesn't mean it isn't a great game. The single player element is still exciting, and multiplayer has more options than ever – if you're a fan of Call of Duty, Modern Warfare 3 is a no brainer.
  2. Dec 28, 2011
    84
    Modern Warfare 3, while still an excellent thrill ride in its own right, feels far too similar to MW2 or even Black Ops for my taste.
  3. I never expected Modern Warfare 3 to go toe-to-toe with EA's juggernaut this year, but it came out of the gates with a tour de force campaign and co-op mode. It loses points with a perhaps too-familiar multiplayer that caters to the juvenile on Xbox Live; though don't be mistaken, Modern Warfare 3 is one hell of a shooter and a highlight for a series that just won't die – no matter how much we wish it bloody would, at times.