User Score
3.3

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 8549 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 27, 2013
    5
    Each new Call of Duty release has now become a truly global event as the hype machine builds towards its launch. Anyone who is a fan of the franchise will be getting exactly what they expect for their money. The campaign is as action packed as ever but even at just four hours long it became a bit of a chore to play through as it offers little that hasn’t already been seen in previous entries in the series. Other criticisms that could be levelled at any Call of Duty game, such as an over reliance on scripted events and sections with infinitely respawning enemies, also still apply here. On occasions it is easy to get wrapped up in everything that is going on but for me these instances were the exception rather than the rule.

    Online multiplayer has also changed very little aside from a few new perks. The maps themselves are however rather disappointing this time around, none of them are downright poor but none could really be considered a true classic in the same way as Crash or Overgrown from previous games. In fact there is a distinct lack of variety in the maps with none really offering the opportunity for sniping or long range combat (although some may see this as a good thing I suppose). The Special Ops missions from Modern Warfare 2 also return and provide a good selection of challenging co-op game. In the end, despite the fact that the formula is now starting to wear a little thin, it seems as though the majority of people aren’t disappointed with Modern Warfare 3 as sales yet again reached record numbers.
    Expand
  2. Apr 6, 2014
    10
    A great game is spontaenous , Great , and bad ass game . the modern warfare series and trilogy is one of the greatest cod series i have ever seen . i do'nt understand why anyone dislike the best cod game
  3. Oct 3, 2012
    3
    Incredibly dull and unbelievably blatant remake of every other Call of Duty game and provides nothing new to the series about from updated graphics and different weapons. The only humans that will enjoy this are hyperactive twelve year olds who play for the repetitive online gameplay, not the story...well if it has a story.
  4. Jan 18, 2012
    7
    A few days ( weeks ) ago I was able to play Modern Warfare 3 for the first time in the PS3 version. I have complains in the multiplayer , impressed with the campaign and satisfied with the great co-op. As I said in my PS3 review, CoD is mainly in the multiplayer side and needs to shake things a little bit more before it gets mauled by other successful multiplayer games. The Xbox version its not very different at all , still the two great features in here is the co-op and the campaign but not wise move folks. Collapse
  5. Aug 24, 2012
    5
    As a package, Modern Warfare 3 isn't as hideous as these scores suggest. Sure, multiplayer is a massive let-down and really deserves no credit whatsoever as it is a step backwards; with very little additions and worse maps. The gameplay online is completely ruined in every, and we all have our reasons to justify this. However, the campaign is still good and spec ops/survival is still better than what Battlefield 3 has to offer. My biggest problem with spec ops and survival isn't the fact that they are exact copies of the campaign missions and survival is effectively combat training on multiplayer maps, but that you can't compete on the leaderboards for survival and spec ops missions if you don't have Xbox LIVE Gold. If you can find it for a decent price I would recommend it since it doesn't have online achievements so like the other CoD games it's an easy 1000G in the bank and the achievements are well designed. Because I can't credit the multiplayer, I can only recommend this based off campaign and spec ops. Obviously it's got nothing on CoD4 but in my opinion the campaign is on par if not better than Modern Warfare 2's, purely because it plays slightly more like Call of Duty 4 and is a bit more varied and has a better story. It also concludes the trilogy whereas MW2, while it was good, felt more like a filler. It is short and easy, but not astronomically aweful like the multiplayer. Since spec ops and survival aren't anything special either (but they are still decent) MW3 isn't very good value for money. So overall, bearing in mind that it's a sequel to one of the most critically acclaimed games and Sledgehammer/Infinity Ward only had a year to develop it; on balance it comes out as a 5 out of 10. However, it is perfectly acceptable to rate this game much lower based on expectations and its multiplayer. Certainly the graphics are not improved, but this is mainly due to the low resolution required to maintain 60 frames per second. I didn't buy this game on release and after reading reviews and watching gameplay I knew what to expect. I'm really struggling to give this game a 5 out of 10 because there has been so little creativity in virtually all areas, but if I ignore the title it's what I believe the game deserves on its own merits. Expand
  6. Feb 2, 2012
    1
    Since Black OPS release The Call Of Duty Franchise Became repetitive. Same guns same features. It gets to the point in where im like "why do i even buy COD anymore its a waste of $60.00
  7. Mar 24, 2013
    8
    Not bad! The graphics were exceptional but the story line was very repetitive. Some levels were a drag, where others were actually pretty good.
  8. Nov 14, 2012
    2
    The Call of Duty franchise has become a monstrosity in gaming culture. Its dependence on old gameplay techniques first used in Call of Duty 4 are wearing thin, resulting in a year by year re-release with a different name stapled to the front of it. WWIII has begun, Makarov is watching his plan unfold in front of him as countries fall to the might of the ultranationalists. The now disavowed S.A.S team TF141 containing a dying Soap, Cpt Price and Nikolai must attack the ultranationalists at tier core so the world can see another day. The game continues to use the same gameplay techniques from 2007's Call of Duty 4 which have long become stale and overused, the franchise has no right to remain in action after such an appalling attempt at making a game. Maybe its time Call of Duty should bite the bullet and let a more deserving title take centre stage. Expand
  9. Nov 13, 2011
    7
    The Call of Duty creators must be criticized for having the greatest opportunity in the industry with unlimited resources to only coming up with a half good product. CoD is value for money but is lacking in original creativity. The special Ops is well done, the story pretty much sucks (no excuses - it sucks and you have brain damage if you think it's a good story), and the multiplayer is the same as ever with little innovation. I do recommend MW3 due its surface fun and value for money but it lacks to what should have been something much much more. Expand
  10. Dec 26, 2012
    3
    What happened to you Call of Duty? Call of Duty MW 3 is no different at all. Very good campaign but too short. Multiplayer is still unbalanced since MW2(even more terrible then this game).Spec ops is boring and still no fun at all. The meow survival mode with it is bad too with it ggetting boring almost as soon as I play it. The only good thing about this game is the campaign and if that was bad them would give this game a 1. Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 3.3/10. Expand
  11. Dec 27, 2013
    7
    It's Modern Warfare 2.5. Infinity Ward have finally showed signs of aging and depletion as Modern Warfare 3, which would be a good game on its own without any history, comes off as a hardcore "been there, done that" experience instead of the trend-setting FPS experience that the previous two Modern Warfare games succeeded with. If you haven't played much Call of Duty in the past, then MW3 is a good game to get in on. But if you've been with CoD for the last few games, or the entire franchise, then you too will likely start feeling the effect of a tiring game. Personally, I'd rather people keep playing Modern Warfare 2 because that to me is the best CoD gets. Expand
  12. Nov 28, 2013
    4
    seriously what is the problem in innovate a little in the why they always do this with us,i hated this game,it is almosta copy of modern warfare 2,most disapointing game of the year.
  13. Dec 31, 2011
    2
    MW3 does absolutely nothing to the FPS genre. Like what saltychipmunk said, sequels mean innovation. As far as innovation goes, this game is the pits. In fact, it is pretty much the same as MW2, (since I played it with a few buddies once), just with new guns and maps and perks. It would've been fine as DLC, but as a full-retail game, not so much.
  14. Nov 29, 2011
    7
    What's with all the hate??? You guys are pretty much criticizing it for it's lack of originality and innovation instead of the overall gameplay experience and only a few too little comments mentions it. MW3 is an okay game and though the same as previous COD games, what the hell did you expect? The gameplay is of course, the same and offer no new gameplay mechanics but why fix what's not broken and the graphical style has age quite well since MW2. Single player: I thought the single player was much better than Battlefield 3 because I was already emotionally invested on the main characters from COD4 and the set pieces and overall pacing was just better (though the "shock moment" was completely unnecessary and out of context). Multi-player: Same old yet still intense and fun to play and I do like the dog tag collecting after you kill someone, which actually ruins a camper's day and makes the matches more fair. To be honest, it's still the same as the other COD games but it's kind of pointless to bash it for its lack of originality because its not the only game franchise that has used their formula over and over again . MW3 is fun to play overall. The single player is fun but it does not have a good replay value like COD4 had and the multi-player is still as intense and mindlessly fun since the previous games. Expand
  15. May 2, 2012
    1
    I was so excited when the teaser came out, but now i barely even play this stupid game. It is MW1+MW2=This piece of **** I still somewhat like the gameplay, but the rest of the game sucks. Same old poor 2007 graphics, poor maps, and nothing new. Not worth $60.
  16. Nov 9, 2011
    3
    If you've played any previous Call of Duty, you've played MW3. There are so many rehashed missions that you can no longer believe they're self-aware parodies. I'm going to hazard a guess and say that over half the campaign is some form of on-rails shooter, following behind a guy and doing exactly what he does (Soap Says... go to the prone!), or a slow-mo shootout after breaching a door. The online portion is about what you'd expect, fairly decent with a few added features, but nothing particularly groundbreaking. Overall it feels like a reskin of Black Ops. Expand
  17. Dec 30, 2011
    10
    Has anyone ever hear"if it isn't broke then don't fix it?"Well There first two games were nothing short of amazing and gaming at it's best.The third game just tweaks little things and adds a ton of new content to make this the best in the series and when I say that i also mean Black ops.This game goes above and beyond any war game ever made and in my opinion it was the third best game made in 2011.This was the best shooter, though, made in 2011.There formula was perfection well they tweaked perfection and came up with a game that eclipses ALL of the war games ever created and a game that will be played 10 years from now.Just look how there is still 3000-7000 people playing the first COD modern warfare and that was made back in 2007.This game just went beyond my expectations and I LOVE IT ! Expand
  18. Jul 31, 2013
    9
    What a big surprise, there are 5,149 haters, fan boys and players that just SUCK at the game. At the VERY LEAST, this game is a 6. At the most, for people who are good at COD and for people who enjoy such a solid and easily controllable engine with balanced weapons and good maps, this game is a 9. This game is what Modern Warfare 2 SHOULD have been. Specialist is wonderful for those who HATE being on an uneven ground against other players. Support is great for those who suck and assault great for campers. This game caters to all. The single player wasn't the best, but it finished the trilogy nicely and had good action. Expand
  19. Aug 8, 2012
    5
    The campaign was actually really good, and I enjoyed playing it just like I enjoyed playing the prequels, however multiplayer felt more or less the same as Modern Warfare 2, if not worse, it felt slower and it didn't even really have the 'new' element to a game that a new call of duty installment should. But hey, its Call of duty, I still play it.
  20. Mar 14, 2012
    7
    This game is not a 1. Nor is this game a 10. It falls in the category of average to good. Despite only slightly enjoying this game, I find myself coming back to it again and again to play with friends. This is the point of this game, and the developers know it. My rating is based on a combination of the campaign and the multiplayer. CAMPAIGN: 4.5/5
    The campaign is absolutely
    beautiful. Some graphic problems are present and that is essentially why it doesn't get a perfect score. The story is an excellent continuation of Price's story, and the missions are exciting and gripping. I played through on veteran difficulty and it was extremely challenging and felt realistic and accurate. There is very little I would change about this game up to this point.

    MULTIPLAYER: 2.5/5
    Okay, this is where problems begin. Firstly, for Xbox 360 users paying for ELITE for me is just a money grabbing ploy. The map packs in Black Ops were ridiculously priced for the amount of content, and this is even worse. Considering we will be seeing Treyarch's newest addition within the next 6-8 months, this is not a prudent investment for me. Secondly, the game mechanics are unbelievably absurd; hardcore players will find their rockets and grenades useless against Ballistic vests; Shotguns can kill at greater than 30 meters; No recoil on high-level SMG's. Essentially, the multiplayer does not play to people who use strategy, it plays to random chaos. Kill confirmed is a nice addition, but the ricochet system results in your death for other people's stupidity. The hardcore system in Black Ops was much fairer as team-killing resulted in getting kicked after 2 offences. Once you drop a martyrdom grenade and your teammate runs over it you will know what I mean.

    Overall, good to average. Brilliant campaign, bad multiplayer. That's it.
    Expand
  21. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    With stale online, a short campaign, and dated visuals, Modern Warfare 3 does not stand the test of time, and has brought Call of Duty down on the path of death. However, multiplayer has been improved a bit, the ending to the campaign is good enough, and Spec Ops provides a few thrills. However, this game's stale design and gameplay make Black Ops seem like a completely different game in terms of the changes. Modern Warfare 3 is a rental at best. Expand
  22. Feb 12, 2013
    6
    I'm basing this score on buying this game for around twenty dollars and the percieved value of enjoyment I got out of this. I learned awhile ago not to buy these shooter games for the full $60 because I found out that I really don't enjoy playing multiplayer. So this score is also reflected mainly on the single player experience. Ahem....That was incredibly short even for a Modern Warfare game. The final game to what turned out to be an over-the-top storyline trilogy was over before it even began. It didn't even take me four hours. I still run around like a chicken with my head cut off getting barked at for going the wrong way, or taking my time taking out a tank, or whatever,...and its still a fun first person shooter. Lots of increadible destruction graphics, struggling to get out of debris or from falling from dizzying heights. Again, the story line is over the top and doesn't make much sense or have any realism to it, but it is interesting as any Darkhorse comic out there that ask us to suspend disbelief. Fun game and worth it for twenty dollars, no more, but still could have fleshed out the storyline and should have made it a bit longer than 3 and a half hours. Expand
  23. DME
    Dec 20, 2012
    7
    In short, MW3 is a solid game, but not as good as Black Ops. The campaign isn't memorable and multiplayer has it's ups and downs. The survival mode, however, is a lot of fun.
  24. Mar 2, 2012
    0
    I usually write long detailed reviews. This won't be a long review. I am... tired. I am exhausted. People love this game, it sold more than skyrim. That's the current state of our society. This review I am writing, it's meaningless - It won't change anything. Those people who play this game, are far greater in numbers than us. They don't care about metacritic. What's the point? Why am I even writing this. I guess... there is hope. We do exist. People do understand that the few of us who actually like to feel, and think, and imagine - want something. Games are getting made that appeal to us. And there are probably just as many games that appeal to us as there are games that appeal to the 'mainstream casual consumer'. So.. maybe we are not doomed. Expand
  25. May 7, 2013
    3
    MW3 ruins the entire MW series. I think MW2 is the best CoD in the series and where the series also went downhill afterwards. The story in MW3 was obviously rushed and butchers the entire series with huge plot holes, and impossible to believe logic. Also, Multiplayer was not very well balanced and spawn killing was a massive issue. I did get some fun out of MW3 but i do not play it anymore unlike other CoDs. I still play MW2, BO 1+2, and WaW) Expand
  26. May 22, 2013
    8
    Hold on, 5,500 negative reviews on this game? That's just stupidity. Yes this game is more of the same, but thats exactly what most of you people wanted. The storyline is tied up perfectly, multiplayer is an improvement and overall it's a decent game. Definitely doesn't deserve a 3.3.
  27. May 29, 2013
    4
    Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 was very disappointing to me. The campaign was only in the range of 4 hours long and not nearly as many Spec Op missions (unless you pay extra as DLC) and the multiplayer is also another grenadefest. Out of the Modern Warfare trilogy, this is by far the worst and wouldn't recommend getting. However, to give credit where credit is due, the campaign, despite being short, was entertaining and the spec op missions were fun, but MW3 just feels like a step backwards from it's previous game. Expand
  28. Nov 24, 2013
    4
    I played this with my friend, who is a CoD fan, and I got to say I was very unimpressed. It seems to be recycling the same garbage over and over again, to the point where people are just so confused onto the way that games are made.
  29. Oct 25, 2012
    4
    While the multiplayer delivers it eventually starts to feel like the same game as the others it feels as though all the guns do the same thing and the campaign is exciting but very short the deathstreaks and perks ruin the multiplayer and it loses it's replayablity spec ops is exactly the same as before and survival mode is less then impressive downgrade of zombies
  30. Mar 6, 2012
    10
    I hate it when if you hate something you are called a troll. first of all when CoD 4 came out I liked it. But it's the same game they release everyyear and it sucks now. No the people that are complaining about this game are not trolls,they are giving REAL reasons on why they hate this game. Activison is a spammer, they spam the same game at you every year. It's funny how they do not take long to make CoD games, it's because they copy and paste everything... from sounds,guns EVERYTHING. By the end of this year we will have 17 or 18 Call of Duties... They will come out with A PS Vita version too, they are comming out with Black Ops 2, Pretty soon you wont know which Call of Duty came out first... Why don't all games just be called Call of Duty? Pretty soon you will buy a different game, and Call of Duty will be in the box.... there's no escaping Call of Duty. Activison is ruining the gaming industry, and you guys are letting them... How about we have a kinect version aswell? Call of Duty needs to die, and if it doesn't we probably will have another videogame crash, like we did a long time ago when E.T came out for the Atari... Everyone should take there CoD games and fly them to a hidden desert and bury it. Better yet, how about we take all C0D games and spend a few billion dollars and fly them into the sun. I'm guessing that wouldn't work either, the sun would get sick of playing C0D all the time too and explode... Mark my words... I bet when everyone gets tired of Call of Duy..Activison will keep making them, but call it something else. From now on they should just call it Re-call of Duty... And on the box it should say " Now with more of the same" 2 weeks later out comes Re-call of Duty 2 Pink Ops. And Super Call of Duty brothers. Expand
  31. Nov 24, 2011
    9
    I wasn't even going to get this game,as i'm disappointed with the lack of evolution with the series,lack of campaign Co-Op & increasingly ridiculous storylines.Also the multiplayer wouldnt interest me.After a friend passionately recommended it to me,i took a punt & bought it.I'm very glad i did,because the campaign suprised me by its quality & length.In fact its my favourate campaign out of the whole Call of Duty series so far,which i was NOT expecting.Its a VERY good campaign indeed.. Although the multiplayer still doesnt interest me,i was again very pleasantly suprised by the new survival mode,which is much better than i thought it would be.Spec Ops is ok from what i've seen so far,but its about time we ditched these half -baked Co-Op 'Side' modes & gave us full Campaign Co-Op.you are in a squad,or not alone,after all.World at War managed to to it,so theres NO excuse!(I'm looking at you too Battlefield!) Hell if this game DID have Campaign Co-Op,i think it easily would've been one of my favourate games of all time.But it hasnt,so i wont go there.I still dont know why Activision thinks this game is worth more than all other games,price-wise,but this is a much better game than i was expecting it to be,evolution or not.I still prefer Battlefield 3 that little bit more,due to the fact that i find both its Campaign & Multiplayer good fun(That game needs Campaign Co-Op too,hence the scores not 10 for that either),but technically i still give both games a solid 9.For once the hype is warranted with this game,& i never thought i'd be saying that about a Call of Duty game for a while.. Expand
  32. Nov 17, 2011
    2
    This game has bad graphics compaired to other games first of all, second is the voice actors are horrible, third is the story is crap, the game looks dated, the only play is very laggy and sluggish for no reason, and it also freezes sometimes. Total waste of money.
  33. May 18, 2012
    8
    New review: If you dislike this game TRULY-- I feel bad for you. I understand why, I enjoy this game and I noted my reasons why. But if you want your money back - well, you know what to do. But, for those trolling (90%) you guys are d*cks. Let me tell you how I know, when the Black ops II trailer was released, there were haters with a simple excuse. "1t l00kz stewpid" Are you kidding me? Call of Duty is hated for no reason, simply because it is popular. Do your resarch Treyarch is trying very hard in every mode to please you guys, and you continue to 'hate' it. (You secretly like it) so grow the balls to give the franchise some love (at least for Black Ops II) and quit the hate. They are doing something different - If I read reviews when it comes out saying 'i h8 teh future' or 'day did n0t chang der engin' I am going to flip. Expand
  34. Nov 20, 2011
    7
    This review only covers the single-player campaign.
    Overall, MW3 is a decent entry in the series, although it lacks some of the coherence of earlier installments. While MW2 and, to an extent, MW, set up clearly delineated plots following individuals through effective story arcs, MW3 bounces around a little too much, taking you to exotic locales, certainly, but seemingly only because they
    wanted to be able to say the game takes place in the US, Paris, London, and everywhere else. The resolution to a major series arc, the invasion of the US, is rushed and largely ignored. The campaign is chaotically structured, which helps keep the player off-balance, but also prevents a large degree of emotional investment in any of the played characters or, for that matter, the situation the world is in.
    That said, the gameplay is solid, just as it was in MW2. This is no accident; no substantial changes occurred to the engine, so MW2 players will be able to pick up MW3 without any difficulty at all. The game is relatively entertaining and provides enough variety to keep your interest through its campaign.
    Unfortunately, that doesn't mean much. The campaign is depressingly short, about eight hours. For a $60 game, this is too short by half, shorter even than MW2. In truth, it feels more like a long DLC rather than an installment in the series. For campaign players, though, it's a solid game, good adventure, and has enough spice to make it fun. It is on the short side, but manages to close the story without feeling rushed. Consider waiting until prices fall somewhat, though, if you're not keen on multiplayer.
    Expand
  35. Sep 3, 2012
    6
    Overall I must agree that this game is a disappointment. It is not a bad game, just very disappointing. When people pay $60 for something, which in today's economy is a nice hunk of change, they do so to get something worthwhile out of it. If you spent your $ on this game, your most likely going to feel it wasn't worthwhile. This is surprising too do to the fact that Infinity Ward is not a joke company. The game is just way too similar to 2, pretty much NOTHING new is offered, and anything that is new including guns/perks, aren't good. I would like to say however that this game does not deserve a 3.2 user score, that number is definitely nerf-trolled. There are still people plenty of people playing the multiplayer and I still think co-op with a friend online is a blast. I no longer own a XBox but I will most likely be getting Black Ops 2 for the PC, IMO they are a much better game all around and BO2 looks promising. Expand
  36. Nov 12, 2011
    5
    I absolutely loved the first Modern Warfare, and the second was alright. Black Ops wasn't the most original CoD, but there was still things I liked about it, as you could tell Treyarch was really trying to step out of Infinity Ward's shadow. Modern Warfare 3 didn't disappoint me, but it made me feel a little empty. Even as I'm writing this review, commercials keep talking and boasting about the game. The game doesn't seem good enough to receive THAT much praise and attention. The campaign is alright, and I enjoyed the Special Ops more due to being able to find players randomly on it instead of MW2's crappy "you have to invite a friend!" system. The multiplayer is even laggier than before and makes it almost unplayable - mixed in with elitist kids who only experience the highlight of their lives by running around with UMP's and the Steady AIm perk. Expand
  37. May 7, 2013
    6
    I cannot play MP since it felt like However, still like the SP, the story sometimes made no sense, but the missions self just getting better and better. I gave it a six, because I remember at one time I was like, OK, the storyline of the cod MW trilogy is still better than Mass effect, at least at the end Makarov got killed, his father didnt show up and told me how misery of Makarovs childhood and I should feel sorry for him, then the father gave me three choices to, 1. kill the father, but in the meantime somehow kill all the people with horrible childhood, 2. transfer&merge to the father, and use my love to change Makarov and everyone lives happily afterwards, 3. replace Marakrov as the leader of the gangs.... so, yeah, as the end episode of cod, it is not that bad. Expand
  38. Jun 11, 2013
    3
    When we want a sequel to a game we like, we do not mean just continue the story, change the weapons around, refine the multiplayer with horrible claustrophobic environments and introduce Survival. We also mean INNOVATION; new things, differences to gameplay and feel, better graphics and multiplayer, and non of that is in Modern Warfare 3, instead, this is just an exact copy & paste of Modern Warfare 2 and even uses some of the same buildings from Call of Duty 4 as you play. The single player is good, but doesn't explain enough about what's going on with the countries in Europe other than England, France, Germany, Czech Republic and US, and just states that there are chemical attacks going across the continent. This is World War III and doesn't even explain and show what happens after in the ending, it's abruptive. Speaking of Survival, it is great, but you have to rank up which is totally unnecessary and takes a long time, not worth all that in just a survival game... atleast let our multiplayer progress affect this. Anyway, you only have 30 seconds between waves and that's not enough for you to run to every shop, get everything you need and run back to where you were or where you want to stay, what you should do is leave 1 person and kill him when you're ready for the next wave. But what really annoys is that when you buy attachments for your guns, you can't get extended mags or rapid fire. The multiplayer maps are bland and such close quarters, and now you only get 1 grenade, 1 rocket shot, 1 grenade launcher shot and no more FMJ. The only improvement on the multiplayer is new game modes such as Infection, Kill Confirmed, Hot Drop and Team Defender. MW3 is a crap game, awful multiplayer, and the graphics are exactly the same which not only brings down the game so bad, but also makes the game bland and boring, especially in the single player. Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 demonstrates the laziest way to produce a sequel to a video game and I'd hate to see any other developers foolish enough to do so, and because Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer were, you will either love this because it's the exact same game, or you will hate this because it's the exact same game. which one? Expand
  39. Nov 12, 2011
    0
    This game is pure fail, graphics are old, if someone who loves cod go's and plays the game called two worlds they would comment n how bad the graphics are...there the same year engine! And them mp is boring with bad maps. Just a total fail game. At least now people are starting to realise. It's just a cash cow with nothing new. When a sexual comes out it HAS to be an improvement or this kind of thing happens.... Or should I just get a marker pen and write the number 2 in my Beverly hills cop 3 DVD and just pretend that's it's an improvement from the 2nd. Call me a hater and your blind! Look at my other reviews, I used to like cod and I have also given bf3 a bad review. If a game company doesn't put serious work to update a game, not just single player and a game mode it should be worth the money that they get in profit. Or should be be paying the £40 for any old game and then when a "top title" comes out it should be £42.99 emm NO! Bad games that fall to a serious price drop should not be the £40 price anyway, and then high street stores rip you off even more. Shame though as my gamestation has stacks of mw3 left that you could build a child's fort out of. Anyway cod is nothing but a cash label now. It brings some serious hype everyyear with the name only. Some of the reasons why, it used to be really good, kids will hype there friends, teenagers want to seem cool, adults just want a shooting game. And when a company does well it wants to stay at that level for as long as it can. But think of it this way, if coca-cola want to try new flavours like cherry and lemon etc etc, when one of the flavours suck sooooo bad they cant just wack out coca-cola in a "strawberry" flavour can. It's the same ingredients as the last 4 cod games before it, when you take away the same graphics, the same story, the same mp experience, the same weapons with a new name, the same dated textures, the same easy 4 hour story, the same stupid ott missions, all that's left is a white picture with a man holding a gun on the display case. And if that's worth paying full price for then troll on this comment, because we both know that I'm right! Expand
  40. Jan 27, 2014
    10
    Most trolled review score on metacritic, to have this game sitting at a 3 is a joke.

    Easily as good as the 2nd modern warfare game but with the addition of survival mode, and a far more accessible and broad multiplayer. Slight graphics upgrades and slightly more interactive storytelling.

    I give this game a 10 largely because it is the only shooter which has entertained me enough to
    play through the campaign more than once, and in terms of survival and multiplayer I clocked more hours on this game than any other on the 360 generation (splitscreen survival is great fun with a friend beside you) I feel like that is as good a reason as any for a top review but even if you don't feel it is worth that just ignore the ridiculously low scores and play this game it is well worth your time. Expand
  41. Nov 19, 2012
    0
    This game sucks. The only good thing to this game, is the graphics, and even those are slightly out of date. The multiplayer is unbalanced, the campaign is awful. And worst of all campers.
  42. Nov 8, 2011
    9
    I got what I expected. It's an enjoyable experience that improved upon the MW2. Multiplayer is also improved. It has new options for customization. I don't have the costly elite online, so I can't speak to that. The campaign is ok within the context of the established story. It's COD at it's finest. If you liked the previous games, this is only a slight variation on a successful formula. And that's not a bad thing. Expand
  43. 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. 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
  44. Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Ill cut this short. I bought, I played, I returned.
    This game is an utter rubbish and fails to deliver any sought of hype. MW2 supposedly the biggest selling entertainment in the world has spent all their profit on stupid advertisement. There is nothing new and TWO COMPANIES DEVELOPED IT! Maybe if this was a $30-40 expansion for mw2, i wouldnt mind but come on, u must be joking
  45. Nov 10, 2011
    10
    Incredible......beautiful, the best Call of Duty yet, one of the years greatest games. I wasn't just impressed with MW3, I was BLOWN away! The campaign alone is enough reason to call it 2011's best shooter, and maybe even "Game of the Year." The multiplayer and Spec Ops are just as good as they ever were, if not, better. But what's really truly amazing and best about MW3 in my opinion is it's single player campaign experience. The cinematic moments were awe inspiring, unforgettable. My jaw literally dropped when I saw the Pairs Tower fall, and everything else. The scale of MW3 is just so much larger then any other Call of Duty game yet, and it's so beautiful. Now I'm not one of those super huge COD fan boys that thinks COD is better then anything else and everything else sucks. I've always liked the Call of Duty games, but I've never been obsessed over the series. I was already excited enough for MW3, with it being all about World War 3 and continuing a story line that I was already very in too. So like I said, my expectations were blown away! Although MW3 may have nothing new to offer when it comes to gameplay, that is no reason not to love this game and everything else it has to offer. Those who are just in it for the multiplayer are coming in short handed and not even experiencing half of what MW3 really has to offer and the amazement that comes with it.

    Hands down, MW3 is more then worth buying. It's a game the other game designers should really envy. The only reason the ratings are so low for most of the gamers here, is because they only play the multiplayer and are not getting MW3's full experience. (Not that the multiplayer is something anyone should be disappointed about.) Either that or the Battlefield 3 lovers. Or the COD haters all around. **** you guys. You don't know a good game when you see one. Trust me, play that campaign with it's incredible story, cinematic beauty, and overly entertaining missions, and you'll call MW3 one of the greatest games ever made, I grantee it.
    Expand
  46. Nov 26, 2011
    9
    Although Modern Warfare 3 is not much different from the other two Modern Warfare games, it is still a great game that is worth playing, I do not see why people give it a zero just because it's unoriginal and that is just absurd because either they just hate Call of Duty and give it a 0 on purpose (Something that makes me really mad because they were not looking at the game's aspects at all) or they are left wanting (understandable but not a good enough reason to give the game a zero) . Modern Warfare 3 is a great game that has some new things to offer that will keep you entertained for more time. The graphics are good, they may be no where near as good as Uncharted 3's or Arkham City's but still nice. The voicework and explosions are great as always and the playability has always been great. The plot for the campaign is not that great this time around as it has always been so I was dissapointed in the plot but the multiplayer is as fun as always and Spec Ops is even better with Survival mode so the whole thing is still fun to play. The flaws are that there is not much that makes MW3 different frm MW2 other than the campaign and Spec Ops and multiplayer additions and the campaign has some wears and tears that does not make it as interesting or as enjoyable as the plots of the other two games but this is minor compared to the rest of the package. Overall, Modern Warfare 3 is a great game that is worth playing, if you are new to the series you will love it but is you've played the other games you will be somewhat dissapointed at the lack of new content but you should still play the game though. MW3 is one of the great games in 2011 that should not be missed. Breakdown for "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3": Presentation: 8, Graphics: 9, Sound: 9.3, Playability: 9.5, Lasting Appeal: 9, Verdict: 9 out of 10 "Amazing". Expand
  47. Nov 14, 2011
    8
    Linear campaign with explosions straight out of a Michael Bay summer blockbuster? Check. Competitive multiplayer with unlocks, perks and kill streaks? Check. The game even runs on the same engine as its predecessors. So why does it deserve a positive score? The answer is simple: it's fun. Deducting points for a lack of innovation is warranted, but to ignore the fact that MW3 is a very solid game would be a disservice to yourself as a gamer. It might not wow you the way COD4 did, but this remains a very good shooter. Expand
  48. Nov 2, 2013
    6
    MW3 is easily the worst Call of Duty to date. The campaign is short (and story is absolutely terrible), multiplayer is more of the same, and the game's overall feel just seems like a slightly beefed up MW2. The original Modern Warfare had one of the best campaigns of any game and MW3 continues the trend of the very cheesy and ridiculous story that MW2 had. It is very disappointing since the original Modern Warfare was so incredibly awesome. MW3 multiplayer is not even nearly as fun as the previous Black Ops. I played probably hundreds of hours of online Black Ops and couldn't get into MW3's at all. Expand
  49. Mar 2, 2013
    1
    COD MW3 was the worst thing in FPS history. The dialogue in the game makes absolutly no sense at all, the single-player will be completed in two days even on Veteran difficulty, MW3 is supposed to be set in WWIII so WWIII was only two days, I mean WWI lasted for 4 years, WWII lasted even longer for 6 years, but WWIII is only two days? WTF. Oh yeah the pointless shooting in this game is absurd, like in the first mission in NYC when you're playing as Frost, once you get out of that chopper, Im serious the exact second you come out, GODMODE is on, you're just some Terminator shooting the out off everybody, hopefully this is the last MW game. 1/10 Expand
  50. Apr 24, 2012
    10
    MW1 was the game I bought an Xbox360 to play.MW2 and 3 were pretty much the same game with different maps. I don't play online much as all the geeks online don't do much other than swear at each other, so the single player game is quite important to me. Its not bad. Its too short and a bit too 'supersoldier' - but aren't all the shootemups these days? Basically, if you liked MW1 and 2 you'll like this. So to end with a question for the developers. We have single player story mode, we have online multiplayer mode - why never any modes with battlemaps, two sides, a single player and loads of bots? Expand
  51. Jun 2, 2012
    0
    I only gave this game a zero because I can't go into the negatives. HEY lets c & p the exact same engine graphics and gameplay from 4mw and add different guns and rerelease it over and over again. This makes me ashamed to call myself a gamer! Truly the Nickelback of the video gaming industry. The same game being released every single year... Absolutely no innovation whatsoever between games. If you want a good first person shooter, play Far Cry 2 or Halo CE Anniversary. This series is **** Expand
  52. May 2, 2013
    8
    Why are there so many trolls.If you were expecting a different game,but i'm sorry,it's not going to change.The campagin is pretty good,multiplayer is great and spec ops is really fun.
  53. Jul 10, 2012
    3
    Overhyped. Overrated. I would go into more detail about how Modern Warfare 3 is a lifeless and boring rehash of the same game from 2007, but all of my complaints have pretty much been said already.
  54. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    I will not be a hater I will agree the campaign needs a touch but cmon people.I think black ops was the best in the COD series but this didnt deserve a 3.2
  55. Nov 14, 2011
    6
    I am not going to be one of these idiots who rates the game zero. I intend to applaud this game for it's good stuff.

    The campaign was by and large pretty decent, and it made for a nice wrap up of the series, but the advertisements said "WW3", the combat is not to that scale, we're talking small scale skirmishes. I do like the new weapons.

    The multiplayer has shown some improvement, but
    while actually playing the game you can't help but feel like you've played this game last year. The Spec Ops Survival mode is fantastic! Unlike Zombies, MW3's survival mode doesn't see you getting completely swarmed in 5 minutes. I managed to get to Wave 25 on my own, which with Zombies was impossible to even get past round 5 on my own.

    Also before the game's release they were boasting about how balanced the game is, when now we have rank 1's facing off against rank 80's on the first day.

    They said they were going to ban cheaters .... no bans have took place as people are still using Lag switches, and glitches.

    CoD Elite premium has not added any extra content to the game so far, and after the 9 month DLC season, I can't see anyone getting Elite premium any more, as there wouldn't be any point in getting it.

    There are no "big" maps.

    Overall they tried, but we got another Copy-paste-edit of last years game. Granted MW3 is better than Black ops is every way.
    Expand
  56. Nov 8, 2011
    10
    Reading through all these reviews I remember not 16 hours ago reading on **** /v/ how they were going to "downvote the **** out of it" I was going to give this game a 8 but I'll give it a 10 since the number's are so skewed
  57. Jan 27, 2012
    9
    Delivers a polished tactical experience, and little else. This is the best Modern Warfare controller we've seen yet. And yet, the story isn't overly compelling. The innovation is lacking compared to the FPS Genre or even previous Modern Warfare games. Even the multiplayer isn't as thrilling as MW2. However, it's still fun and filled with exciting production values and spectacular scale.
  58. Dec 28, 2011
    9
    Much better than I expected. The Multi-Player is top-notch and so is the new Survival Mode. Spec. Ops is back with a lot of improvements, haven't played enough of it to know what they are though. Sadly, I completed the Single-Player Campaign in 4 hours (on Recruit. Sad, I know.... XD). Even in MW2 the Single-Player Campaign was 8-12 hours on Recruit!!!! That's a big disappointment!
  59. Nov 8, 2011
    6
    Very short one this time just highlighting key points.
    Graphics: 6.5 - Certainly not the best on the console anymore, somewhat dated but new engine makes things a bit more sleek.
    Presentation: 6 - Quite well presented but there is a lot of room for improvement again.
    Gameplay: 7 - Keeps the gameplay fresh with the addtion of new modes and some additional features but nothing
    groundbreaking in the slightest
    Lasting Appeal: 7 - Depends on the player, personally the series has become to formulaic and needs a fantastic reboot to help the series make that groundbreaking step of modern warefare this is also applied to why graphics gets a 6.5 its not far enough from nodern warare 2. This game is very frustrating to any fan of the series as it does not innovate but simply reiterates the series formula activision fail to take a risk and end up paying for it through the fans critical analysis of the game.
    Expand
  60. Jan 6, 2012
    6
    In 100% honesty, between Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3, they both suck, and the earlier games in the franchise could do you better... FAR better. Modern Warfare 3 lacks "fun", IMO. Too many people are competitive, and for some reason camping is far more present in this installment than in the previous COD's. The Singleplayer, was the biggest disappointment. I prefer Battlefield 3's, solely because Battlefield 3 ripped of COD4, which was a decent story to unravel. MW3, you just kill Makarov, and for some reason, the developers wanted to kill off all the main characters on the way, which is lazy story telling IMO. But nobody plays this for the Singleplayer, and if you did/were going to get this for that (like I did); trust me, it's crap. The multiplayer will make you want a COD older than Black Ops, and the only good thing that keeps this game "average" IMO, is the Spec Ops Survival mode. Expand
  61. 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 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
  62. Mar 14, 2012
    1
    Leave it to activision to release a new COD... EVERY FN YEAR! Seriously. First of all, its 100% the same as the crap before, with new maps, and worse graphics! The add ons and "elite" are overpriced crap. Most the fans hate this turd. The series needs to end, NOW. How many call of duty titles can they really make? Soon, there gonna make Spyro of duty, Crash of duty, or Skylanders of duty.
  63. Mar 23, 2012
    3
    It boils down to the fact that this is just MW2 with extra Sh*t, The game has done nothing to improve it's self and has only added extra stuff which can be exploited to further ruin the multiplayer experience. The void of dedicated severs is another reason this game is terrible, I mean if battlefield has had them for years now and Activision make billions from CoD I am pretty sure they can afford to get dedicated servers. See the reason they don't add anything good or improve anything bad is because of YOU. Yeah you the person who buys the game because all of you give them your money they have no need to make the game better because they will still get your money so the cheaper it is to make it, the more profit they make. An easy way to know this is the fact they spent less on MW3 then on MW2, if you can honestly accept the same iteration of game every year and consider it good then to be honest the gaming industry is simply going to die with the loss of creativity and good games. Expand
  64. Jan 20, 2012
    6
    Admittedly I never played MWF1 or 2 due to it's Neo-Con/Zionist/Racist propaganda, but have played most of the other COD's hence I think my assessment will be balanced. It's isn't a rubbish game, it isn't a great game, it simply is a game designed to appeal to kids and impressionable minds. My favourite COD is Blacks Ops as it had everything a shooter should have ie an excellent story, excellent multi-player and of course.....Zombies! MWF3 has a great cinematic story which is gripping, but the multi-player is a nest of adolescent children, racist immature thugs, and campers galore. But the gameplay is the real issue as it just isn't balanced, it's like Unreal Tournament but with different weapons. Everything is far too quick, yet lacks the polish and precision of games like GOW and BF. Spec ops is interesting for a while, but again gets boring quickly. Overall I think COD should stop the yearly releases to improve and redesign the formula, however they simply games for profit not entertainment. Or should I say, they entertain the simple to make money. Either way, stick with Black Ops! Expand
  65. Nov 10, 2011
    7
    There is no reason for such awful reviews of this game. I understand everybody is mad because it seems like the same game as MW2 but it isn't, ok? MW3 has a new game mode called "Survival" which is like zombies but with enemy soldiers/aircraft that get harder as you get further. The online play is rivaled by only Battlefield 3 and still cannot touch COD MW3. The first couple weeks are always laggy online due to the sheer amount of people online. Give them some time to work out the bugs people! 7/10 Expand
  66. Nov 23, 2011
    10
    Graphics exactly the same as when the fourth installment was released. All the maps are the same recycled, predictable settings that we'd come to expect from a brainless action shooter. The story is also the same repetitive storyline, just recycled over again to produce something only slightly different. This has the same problems as its predecessors; sloppy movement, annoying AI, predictable storylines and settings, a campaign that is far too short and does not hold up against a second run through. Oh, and the same, wooden characters who shout generic military lines like "Hehehe, this'll get the bastards", and "Light' em up!"

    Exactly what I was expecting from Call of Duty now, just a churned out, thoughtless, soul sucking piece of **** designed only to brainlessley entertain you, but even then it falls short on its second play through.
    Expand
  67. Apr 24, 2012
    4
    Sad excuse for a fps. A game for children who like arcade style crutch guns and upgrades. The longest sniper lane can't be more than two hundred meters. Yet the .50 cal is the most destructive cqb weapon in the game.
  68. Nov 10, 2011
    6
    I'm not into multiplayer gaming these days, so when I buy a shooter I expect a single player game on the quality bar of something Irrational Games might put out. And while I did enjoy the first and second instalment of CoD on PC, I have become pretty jaded at this point with the the Modern Warfare SP campaigns, which is really nothing more than the same game with a different paint job. Spec-Ops mode is fun for what it is, but other than that I cant in good conscience inflate my score any higher than a yellow mark. So sorry to Glen Schofield, I hear your appeal on twitter and I think it sucks that BF fans are being a-holes with the scores because I think that game suffers from the same lack of innovation and quality in the single player department too... But as far as this MW3 is concerned, imo its a mediocre game simply due to the fact I am so jaded on this franchise now. It just doesn't interest me any more... Doesn't mean any dev who worked on this title shouldn't be proud of their work, as usual their is a good level of polish, but even the most addictive innovative game can get boring after a while, especially if its milked so heavily. The tipping point was at MW2 I think, so we've already started on the gradual decline in gamer support for this IP. Anyone in the industry or who has been gaming since the Atari 2600 has seen this happen many times before. Its a slow undignified death. Expand
  69. Nov 11, 2011
    2
    What a bunch of monkey spunk.............. A complete and utter let down, the game has made no games it physics, AI, game play, weoponry, maps anything. My god of all sequels this has got to be up there with the ones that blows the most. I loved.....and i do say loved the COD MW series, and now they have completely turned me off as they produced this crap that did nothing for the genre of games in general.

    Infinity ward just another money grabbing bunch of stokers, hmmmm they have become another EA sports.
    Expand
  70. Jan 9, 2012
    2
    I was never a big fan of FPS games, but i know which of them are good and which are bad. and this "game", is baaaaaaaaad. It's not just bad, it's terrible.
  71. Apr 6, 2012
    5
    My first COD game and I will not be buying another one. I was expecting an intriguing campaign, great effects and graphics etc. and an outstanding multiplayer experience that would have me hooked for hours. Instead I got an average campaign that I have yet to complete, mediocre graphics and a multiplayer experience that left me feeling abused by 'sweats' and I didn't enjoy it one bit. The success of this franchise is built on past games. Incredibly disappointed. Expand
  72. Nov 19, 2011
    9
    A brilliant game, that, with the minute exception of a slight graphical degrade, trumps BF3 in every respect. The campaign is lengthy, and well worth playing, with a very interesting story capable of serving as a conclusion to a brilliant trilogy as well as a stand alone title, so newcomers don't feel at all confused. The gameplay has been refined to an inch of its life and you'll find here the sleekest shooter experience available on any platform. Multiplayer returns with an aplomb, and its the best in the series, bringing back everything we love with a sleuth of new maps and new game modes, as well as teaks and spins on the classic CoD MP formula that do nothing but enhance the experience and shake off any feelings of, "haven't I been playing this for the last two years". Then there's the Spec. Ops, a host of new missions that are frustratingly difficult and incomparably satisfying to complete that'll have you and a friend entertained for hours on end, there's also a neat variation on Spec. Ops known as survival, which is essentially a mix between Zombies (BlOps) and Horde (GoW3), (and by Horde, I mean a version of Horde that doesn't suck balls). Overall, the greatest standard FPS of this console generation, and a must buy for anyone who wants a game that'll last them for months on end. And a personal message to everyone, I'm not a COD fanboy, and i don't hate BF3, in fact, you'll see I've given it an "8", which given the fact that its a $90 game that's only real claim to fame is a decent multiplayer, I think is quite a generous score. Also thanks BF Fanboys for rendering this user review section useless with your completely unbalanced reviews, I hope you feel you've done your duty you half-wited **** Expand
  73. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    I've buyed this game to see the end of the campaign and the survival co-op. The competitive multiplayer is the same of MW2 with some new maps, not a lot of differents killstreaks or perks and some new weapons. Not worth the 70â
  74. Mar 6, 2012
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Alright, let me be clear, if this was an independent game I would give it a 4 or 5 but as a closing game in a trilogy it comes with certain expectations. Those were not met. at all. MW2 was bad, but not anywhere near the level that this game was. Just to hit a few quick points: a coordinated simultaneous terrorist attack across all of Europe, a Russian Navy, a naval invasion of NYC, kidnapping the presidents daughter to coerce him (there are safeguards against this in the Russian laws), the peace treaty being signed with no repercussions, the vigilante justice of Makarov (he would be captured, tried, and hung), the unbalanced multiplayer, the underpowered airbased killstreaks, the broken perks, the support killstreaks, awful spawn system, etc. These are all the things wrong with the game, I don't feel like typing for 20 minutes to elaborate, but look them up if you need to. I'll admit some of spec ops was fun again, but I don't buy games for 5 minute side missions. Expand
  75. Nov 8, 2011
    1
    But oh my god people, You were all saying this was going to be the greatest game ever. Battlefield 3 has nothing on your great innovative Modern Warfare games. Why so serious? We told you it was going to be a rehash but none of you really listened did you? You went out and bought it because it's the cool thing to do, All of your friends have the game. At least you made Activi$ion happy by giving them $60 for a MW2 DLC. In return, Activi$ion used your money to pay off the critics to give it good reviews influencing more purchases. Oh yeah, Call of Duty is soooo much better than Battlefield 3 LOL. Expand
  76. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Deeply disappointed! I have played most fanchises of Activision who has - unfortunately degenerated to a pur cash generating machine completely neglecting their real clients, the gamers. Modern Warfare 3 is at its best a Modern Warfare 2 1.5. Activision, and this is for sure will not see me again.

    Buy Battlefield 3! Enter war and feel it.
  77. Nov 10, 2011
    5
    An honest review of the game to be honest. It's certainly better than MW2, which was an abyssmal mess, but this game has nothing on Black Ops. The maps look different but layout and structure is the same, making the large varitey of guns pointless as only smgs and assualt rifles will be used due to the tiny map sizes. Quick-scoping is back. It can F*** off in my opinion. It was always a terrible addition to the game and it should never have been brought back. Maps are alright but as a whole they are poor due to the total lack of variety. The story is very good though, and is the only reason this game gets a five. The other half (Multiplayer) is a big fat zero due to easily exploited flaws in the system and total inability to bring together teams and reward them for working together. As for Spec Ops, it's still two player only (What the hell Infinity Ward) and survival is a less entertaining re-hashed zombies mode. That's about it. I'll probably be trading in this lame game soon and will be getting Battlefield 3 and see if that's any better. Expand
  78. Nov 13, 2011
    6
    In my opinion MW3 is the MW2 everyone wanted, I'm glad to see infinity ward fixed most the problems from the previous game but considering the way the game looks and plays it seems that the game is just an add on to MW2. New maps, a couple of new game modes, and survival mode are the only new things it has to offer. None of the maps are really mind blowing either. Kill confrimed is a pretty cool game mode I must admit but it can be annoying as **** sometimes too. Then there's survival mode which actually suprised me and is probably the best part of the game. I'm just hoping that the MW series is finished and cod can release a new game that is unlike any of their past 5. Expand
  79. Nov 16, 2011
    6
    the single player and spec ops of this game is fantastic and that receives 5/5 for offline content and cooperative. the special ops is new and fun with a range of unlocks and slick gameplay that can be thoroughly enjoyed and spent many hours playing. the campaign is the typical huge scale explosions and bloody battles that we have come to expect from the modern warfare games and it does not disappoint. where this game does let me down is the multiplayer. as a cod fan from cod4 all the way until now only mw2 slightly compares to the fun factor that call of duty 4 provided. there is significant problems with hit detection and lag unlike the other big shooters that have come out this year, namely battlefield, gears of war and resistance. the game feels old and tired as the same rinse and repeat gameplay has been used. unfortunately in opinion this game is an enourmous jump ahead of blackops. this game has been hyped way out of proportion and does not deliver. not too mention that elite still is not working meaning hundreds of thousands of people have given activision an extra 50 dollars for nothing Expand
  80. Feb 24, 2012
    0
    it's a call of duty game. they're the same every time they come out. Anyone who says "It's so different for the last game that just came out last year" come on people
  81. Nov 13, 2011
    0
    Re reviewing Due to sometghing fishy, in one hour (from about 2:30pm - 3:30pm) over 500 positive reviews were made for this game, some under the 150 character minimum..........This stinks, almost as bad as MW2.5
  82. Nov 29, 2011
    7
    The BF3 campaign is a joke compared to the story of the Single Player in this MW3. Sure the Frost Bite 2 engine is new and shiny, but it runs poorly on consoles and the game lacks creativity both artistically and in terms of game play. And DICE goes on about the limitations of consoles, yet Naughty Dog proves them wrong by outshining them on PS3 graphically with Uncharted 3, even impressing some PC gamers - I'm sure. I was bored quite abruptly with Battlefield 3, the Single Player campaign was dull and the story was too similar to Black Ops' - the only thing I found any enjoyment in was playing Co-Op with a friend. On MW3 I was actually more impressed with the Presentation than I was expecting, especially considering that everything was running at 60 FPS around the even most intense moments. The rating here is unfair, it's become a trend to hate on something that's popular, and I can't say I'm surprised. There is so much content in this game, and so many hours of enjoyment. In regards to Single Player it ties up the story of the Modern Warfare trilogy, otherwise it's more of the same with lots of improvement, which is not a bad thing really. EA has treated their customers poorly by limiting their game to certain stores, and has said that they are going to ruin the Call Of Duty franchise once and for all like they did with Guitar Hero. So I'm not sure the haters of CoD know who they are following here, because this kind of attitude is damaging to the industry as whole. Expand
  83. Oct 17, 2013
    6
    Cod MW3 is only good at multiplayer The single player is not so great Multiplayer on the other hand it's deep cuztomizable and good .the major flaw is the single player and the games presentation they're not presented well
  84. Nov 13, 2011
    7
    Still the best first person shooter multiplayer on the market. Still one of the worst campaign modes of any game. If you liked the other games in the Call of Duty series, you'll like MW3. In my opinion the maps are getting a bit repetitive. It feels like they're taking bits and pieces from older maps and combining them. It's fun, but it's not as innovative as the previous chapters.
  85. Jan 31, 2012
    7
    Overall not a bad game, just an unpolished attempt at making money by Activision. However, I can't deny that it was fun. Singleplayer was mediocre, I really grew to hate the constant enemy spawning and there weren't any memorable characters like Ghost or Gaz from the previous Modern Warfare games. The story wasn't emotional like Call of Duty 4 nor full of 'oh my God' moments like in Modern Warfare 2 (aside from the massive building getting blown up here and there) and I just didn't care in the end. Environments were bland and monotonous, but as said before, I can't deny that it was fun.
    After Modern Warfare 2 multiplayer was where the Call of Duty series was at. Following past Call of Duty titles, Modern Warfare 3 seems to try to push everything from the singleplayer campaign to the multiplayer in the form of killstreaks, which are as crazy as ever. The multiplayer mode was addictive and I found myself enjoying new modes like Kill Confirmed, but being a PC Battlefield player I found the fact that you don't know where the enemy is half the time and the constant sprinting annoying (I've never not known where the enemy is or needed to sprint for really long distances that much in Battlefield 3 on the PC). However, the multiplayer was a step up from Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops, though it failed to improve on Call of Duty 4 chiefly because of all the gimmicks that as well as being useless were sometimes discouraging. Whenever I got a deathstreak I always thought 'I must be going badly', and I started dying even more.
    So to sum it all up, Modern Warfare 3 is worth a bit of your time, but if you have a decent PC then I'd go with Battlefield 3.
    Expand
  86. Feb 17, 2013
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Modern Warfare 3 is a good game for the most. Its not terrible what people make it out to be and it is not the greatest Call of Duty to date. After the events of Modern Warfare 2, many fans and I expected to be a sequel since one of the main antagonists, Makorov escaped. I waited so long for this game to come out and I thought it would be better than Modern Warfare 2, however the game is good and very enjoyable to say the least but it falls a little bit short. The campaign feels much shorter than Modern Warfare 2 and the story is not as good as Modern Warfare 2. The campaign feels that it has to tell a story about how to find Makorov and kill him. Once again the main protagonists in the game are OK, but Modern Warfare 3 doesn't add anything to these characters. I found it very sad that Soap or some character that you played as in Modern Warfare 2 dies during the campaign that made me very upset. Even though the campaign is not as good as Modern Warfare 2, it still manages to fun and pretty good. Last the Multiplayer in Modern Warfare 3 is good and bad. The good is it feels faster, there are some new perks that come in handy, some new weapons like the dreaded Type 95, and the way you get killstreaks is a lot better. The bad is the maps are terrible, most of the killstreaks from Modern Warfare 2 are in Modern Warfare 3, and feels very dull and repetitive. With Modern Warfare 3 not living up to the hype and Modern Warfare 2 does it deserve such a horrible rating? I don't think so. The Multiplayer at the time was one of the better shooters out there, and seeing other crappy shooters, I would play this game all day and get throwing knifed in the face than play those crappy shooters. The game is fun, if you enjoy Call of Duty you will like this game. Expand
  87. Jul 13, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Now before you think i hate this game because it is essentially modern warfare 2.5 well your wrong I hate it because its a terrible game on its own
    pros: Gameplay is still pretty fun, Makarov's death is just so satisfying when it happens, graphics are done well, sound design is flawless it sounds like what a war game should
    cons: the intro movie is awful, new players will be confused and would probably need to play modern warfare 2 (which i recommend you would get that instead of this) bullets flying through cover, the game is too easy I got hit by an RPG and lived ON VETERAN DIFFICULTY, Yuri's death feels like a cheap excuse to kill a russian at the last minute rather then a sacrifice to save Price. Enemy Ai is either the worst i have ever seen or the best I have ever seen (and not in a good way its like they have a supercomputer that comes up with 1000 ways to effectively defeat you) as for the bad AI lets just say enemy's have had guns in my face and just stared until i get bored waiting for them to shoot and just killed them. Soaps death doesn't have the impact it should and it felt to sterotypical. it is so linear, horde mode instead of zombies
    So there you go a bunch of reasons not to buy mw3 if you really need to know the ending just watch it on youtube. If you ever buy a COD game you would be better off with black ops, black ops 2 modern warfare 2 or even wait and see if Cod ghosts brings some cool new features along with dogs and fish. for all the fanboys probably raging at me you should know I dont hate call of duty just this
    Expand
  88. 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. .
  89. Nov 11, 2011
    1
    This game is MW2 with a faster framerate that can not be praised because with the amount of lag on multiplayer it is shadowed. Why is the game bad Well for starters Why I am not a battlefield fanboy after playing BF3 I felt that this game Is a dull piece of crap re-imagining of MW2 therfore should not be a stand alone game and is probably the worst in the series Sorry IW, activision and slegdehammer but you let the fans down and created pure hatred. Expand
  90. Nov 20, 2011
    1
    Have you played COD before? Yes? Then you have played this version of COD before also. Utter cr@p. This is just Activision mugging retards for their money, every year. I'm sure this game will make loads of money, and decent development studios will continue to suffer because people are not playing their games. If you are 12 and have no brain, then by all means play this abortion. Otherwise, go play Battlefield 3. Expand
  91. Jan 4, 2012
    3
    Isn't it a little odd that this game has great reviews from critics and yet the community is tearing it a new one? It's the same crap they cranked out with MW2. An uninspired sequel with very little new content. They'll keep throwing together garbage sequels as long as you people keep buying them.

    They may be paying off the big name critics but the gaming community can see the truth
    about this series. It's a cash cow with very little to offer in quality gaming. Spend some time making a NEW game instead of focusing on cranking out a rehashes sequel each year. Expand
  92. Nov 8, 2011
    2
    Best Buy let a bunch of people in to play the game before picking up the reserved copy, i was one of them. And using the best "no pun" equipment and sound they have to offer i did notice one thing, same same same.. i actually thought about swapping my 5 bucks over to another game, even ordered a phone plane to get a special mw3 case. im a fan of the series but after finishing the campaign and now deploying into full scale multilayer exp, well yes this is the meat and potatoes but its like christmas, always knowing it will be a turkey, was hoping for something beefier and more importantly tastier this time around. immediately i found that it has many new perks and trinkets and 3 different care package types. maps are not very creative and tbh im a bit pissed that these trinkets are to smoke screen one to see the fact that i got robbed , and what i mean is i went all the way, elite pass etc.. even angrier i check many reviews, and read many which give the game a 10, they slam this game left and right, have nothing really great to say and a 10!!! .. this is what ratings have come down to.. buying them.. i will say that the campaign started off slow, confusing but it did finish off splendidly , leaving many questions (i.e soap) answered and picked up right where it left off with 2.. my roomate is laying spec ops and says its the highlight so far, well im just disappointed. every year, the hype , the promise and then the take ..took me for my money.. but hey not a total loss. if spec ops is that good and multiplayer can hold me over a month or so then hey its better than most games do.. but im selling my unused elite membership for 30 bucks, any takers are welcome.. i will not pay for 1 single map. i bought "the other game" and hated the campaign as well, but its multiplayer delivered on many accounts. they promised bigger and better maps. maybe better but still very linear which time and time again they said they would "have an open world fps multi feel" bullsh*T.. who ever says that this is an awesome game, all fresh ideas, way better than ever, well do yourself a favor, dont ride on their "illusions" rent it.. the greatest part so far is the ending, its did bring the story to a conclusion as well as answer some things that left us cod fans mouths gaped open mw2.. but im hoping spec ops is as good as my roomate says.. dont listen to me, go read these "tens and 9.1-5 reviews, ie 1up) and read between the lines, they are paid to say .. they gripe about many things i do but give it a close to perfect score? journalism/ratings/politics are bought by money.. this game broke the hearts f many cod fans, millions of them, i wanted it to be just a little different.. not alot of the same with a few perk changes to try and blind me from what is on my screen.. like i always say, trust yourself, but rent this first, check out your buddies.. and if you are just one of them need to have it, well i must admit, i was in a way the same cod guy.. not anymore. AND NEVER LET ANYONE TELL YOU THAT YOU FINISHED A GAME SO FAST BECAUSE YOU NEED TO SET THE DIFFICULTY HIGHER, A GOOD SOLID CAMPAIGN IS JUST THAT.. ONE WHICH CAN NOT BE BEATEN IN 4 HOUR S EVEN IF SET ON BABY EASY DIFFICULTY, THATS A COP OUT FOR NO/LITTLE CONTENT.. SETTING IT HIGHER JUST MEANS YOU DIE MORE, REPLAY SAME SCENES MORE HENCE "LONGER CAMPAIGN.. THIS GOES 4 ALL GAMES.

    BEAT THIS IN 5 HOURS NORMAL SETTING
    BUT THE GAME IS DESIGNED FOR ITS MULTIPLAYER, ONE WHICH HAS GROWN TO BE VERY STALE AFTER YEARS OF NOTHING NEW, EXCEPT FOR MY BANK ACCOUNT.. SO FREAKIN TIRED OF THIS.
    Expand
  93. Nov 10, 2011
    10
    if it is not broke do not fix it, this is the same COD that everyone loves with more surprises and support options, just keep being the best. not complain that you are putting 0, I think they are frustrated lovers Battlefield.
  94. Nov 27, 2011
    10
    If Modern Warfare 3 reeks the smell of disappointment to you, then go play Battlefield, it might suit your selfish and disparate need for long runs, but if you're a gamer who thinks outside the box, Modern Warefare 3 is enhanced in so many different ways, casual gamers won't even notice. Graphics are improved but only that the experience won't feel any different, a lot more colorful and intact. Frame rate not noticed yet was obviously increased along the more responsive controls and character animation. Multiplayer takes you deeper into the most competitive online experience with the new set of weaponry and strategic tools and the new adaptation of the most addictive Zombie kill fest, the Survival mode, is nothing short of challenging and sheer fun. Expand
  95. Nov 30, 2011
    5
    Well, well. This... sucks. 4 hours of campaign, as usual. Multiplayer is awesome in other CoD's, but in this? Lag, grenadiers, lag, campers, lag, Type 95, lag, assassin.. have I told you about the lag? Type 95 SUCKS. Hate that weapon, grenadiers and assassin, not even talking about. Now campers.. more buyers of MW3 = more kids playing, and more stupid campers waiting for you in a corner, getting 2/0 in every single game. But it's kind of fun to kill campers, and Spec Ops SAVED this game from misery, survival is awesome. Giving this game a 0 is ridiculous, but saying that it's all good is too. Now, let me get back in my helicopter in Battefield 3. Glad I bought it too. Expand
  96. Dec 22, 2011
    4
    The problem with Modern Warfare 3, is that it's essentially Modern Warfare 2.5. No one wants to wait a year, pay full retail price, only to be given a game that's near enough no different to its predecessor. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy playing the games, but the franchise has become a little too generic - and yet people will still buy into the vast amount of advertising spent on this game. Save your money, wait for something original. Expand
  97. Nov 18, 2011
    1
    How do you spell Dialed In? = Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. Save yourself some money and just keep playing Black Ops. It feels (and looks) exactly the same!
  98. Nov 25, 2011
    10
    One of the biggest problems were the maps. When MW3 advertised that you would be fighting around all of Europe, I was expecting Europe. Some parts look like Europe, but you might as well call them a different place and we would buy it. The novelty of playing in Europe is fighting in famous areas. Why not fight in the Eiffle tower or something? Black ops had much more creative maps. A Space shuttle launch, a atomic bomb test site. These maps are absolutly nothing. Nothing special at all, no variety. That was the worst of them all. Metal gear evolves dramatically with each jump. This will forever be the stump in COD's evolution process. Expand
  99. Jan 1, 2012
    10
    Do not listen to the hipocrites who are giving this game 0s out of 10. They complain that Modern Warfare 3 is just the same game as last year but with a new coat of paint. This lie is far from the truth.

    Yes, most of the core mechanics remain the same, but underneath the illusion of it being just another CoD game lies a fantastic shooter. The campaign is probably the best Call of Duty
    campaign yet, with a gripping story, great levels and a ton of explosions to keep you occpupied all the way until the ending. Yes, it may be pretty linear, but I think that the best way to enjoy CoD campaigns is by thinking of it as an interactive movie, then you'll enjoy it best. Besides, it's a more than refreshing change from Black Ops' extremely dull campaign.

    The multiplayer has experienced quite a few changes that improve it, such as reintroducing Deathstreaks and adding Strike Packages. While the multiplayer remains largely the same addictive action that we're all used to, Battlefield 3's is still a lot better.

    Spec-Ops, on the other hand, brings us something more or less fresh: Survival Mode. While it follows the same basic principle as Zombies does (fight waves of attacking enemies that increasingly grow in size and power with a buddy), Survival Mode surprisingly emerges as the stronger component out of the two. Personally I hated Zombies; it got so repetitive struggling to kill these brainless enemies in a range of dull maps, only ever getting to something like Level 12 on my own. Survival Mode, however, can be as accessible as you like, as you instead fight off soldiers rather than the undead. Survival Mode is a deeper, more balanced experience.

    Modern Warfare 3 doesn't change many of its core game mechanics, and its' multiplayer is not as good as Battlefield 3's, but as a shooter PACKAGE, this is one of the best.
    Expand
  100. Jun 25, 2013
    2
    Meh...

    This was nearly identical to MW2. Literally, I think they copied some of each level layout.

    Not only that, but the game is an awful port. We're locked at a console FOV, with poor optimization on high-end hardware. There are no dedicated servers, cheaters and lag abounds, and if my sticky reticule pops to one more enemy automatically I think I'm going to ceremoniously burn this
    game. There is no reason on the PC to make the game aim for the player.

    Multiplayer has literally not advanced at all. Graphics are poor, the engine is out of date. There's nothing but lag, cheaters, and kids whining and screaming over their microphones every time they die. There are no new modes, and no unique guns. You get to choose between slightly different re-skins of the same gun, pretty much, because they're all equally bland and stiff to use.

    There are no advanced physics to enhance dynamic gameplay, still no vehicles, and the killstreaks are more cheap than fun at this point. Who likes to join a match where half your team is just getting insta-killed by a helicopter above the map? Roll the dice. You might not randomly die, between the latency, the aim assist, and the 20 foot knives.

    That's pretty much all this game is. Random death. Grenade spam, camping, quickscope abuse, and lag all contribute to one pathetic package of random death.

    It gets 2 instead of 0 because it's a functional game, and not a pile of slag that nukes your HDD.
    Expand
  101. Jan 18, 2012
    0
    A few days ( weeks ) ago I was able to play Modern Warfare 3 for the first time in the PS3 version. I have complains in the multiplayer , impressed with the campaign and satisfied with the great co-op. As I said in my PS3 review, CoD is mainly in the multiplayer side and needs to shake things a little bit more before it gets mauled by other successful multiplayer games. The Xbox version its not very different at all , still the two great features in here is the co-op and the campaign but not wise move folks. 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.