Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare

 PC
User Score
4.9

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 1348 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 436 out of 1348
  2. Mixed: 307 out of 1348
  3. Negative: 605 out of 1348
Buy Now
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
view
per page
  1. Jester2372
    May 18, 2015
    4
    Overall this is a quality built game with terrible network and support issues from Activision and Steam. This game has true potential but sadly due to the on-going issues with connecting to the game, not being able to load certain maps, lag (SEVERE LAG), to the non existent support, very few people are playing the game.
    It is sad that a good game like this is just hung out to dry because    Overall this is a quality built game with terrible network and support issues from Activision and Steam. This game has true potential but sadly due to the on-going issues with connecting to the game, not being able to load certain maps, lag (SEVERE LAG), to the non existent support, very few people are playing the game.
    It is sad that a good game like this is just hung out to dry because the manufacturer already has their money and does not care at all for supporting their customers.
    More people are playing World at War, MW3, Black Ops2 and often MW2 than are playing this game on a daily basis.
    It is very difficult to find a game anymore and after spending way too much time rebooting and attempting to connect, when you do get in game, the possibility of the map not loading is rather high. It is not unusual for some people to spend 30 minutes each time they attempt to play to only experience multiple issues and when they do get in game, there is a 65% chance the lobby will be very laggy.
    Although I do not have near the issues of my clan mates, I see the struggle daily. After putting in various tickets on my own, I have never received helpful assistance to resolve the on going issues.
    Had these issues been resolved, I would have rated this game around an 8 but I feel more than generous with the 4 as I find myself going to other games way too often simply as a direct result of poor performance on the manufacturers part. Activision is obviously only in business to rob all of us and we are suckers for it.    … Expand
  2. baggytheo
    Nov 7, 2014
    4
    As we all should know by this point, buying any Call of Duty release during it's launch window is a gamble. I decided to plunk down $60 for Advanced Warfare because I was feeling nostalgic for the online play from earlier titles, and the early critic reviews were surprisingly good, so I decided to give it a try. After spending the whole day with the game, I can tell you I found it to haveAs we all should know by this point, buying any Call of Duty release during it's launch window is a gamble. I decided to plunk down $60 for Advanced Warfare because I was feeling nostalgic for the online play from earlier titles, and the early critic reviews were surprisingly good, so I decided to give it a try. After spending the whole day with the game, I can tell you I found it to have been a very, very disappointing purchase--and I am again bitterly reminded of the collusion and softballing that has become so common between developers and game review publishers.

    The game seems to have the ultimate potential to be as fun and enjoyable as some of the best Call of Cuty titles prior. With a little more work, the Exo-Suit mechanics like super-jumping and dodging might a nice fresh spin to the multiplayer. But after 3 years of working on this title in the 10-year-old Call of Duty engine (which you would think should be fairly well mastered at this point, and less resource-intensive relative to modern engines), developer Sledgehammer Games has somehow managed a complete failure in performance optimization to the point where it's baffling how such a low standard would have been allowed by the publisher for release. The very same computer which allowed me to play Black Ops 2 during it's launch window with all graphical settings maxed out, at a solid 60 fps, experiences poor performance, stuttering, and infuriating input lag--even when playing Advanced Warfare on medium-to-low settings with all advanced graphical features turned off. These performance issues are then compounded with extremely poor network performance with the P2P server system used by the game--again, something that is baffling to me given that it's been mastered several times before in the same engine--the background that several other Call of Duty games using a P2P system should have produced for Sledgehammer to draw upon and improve upon, but somehow they have released with a system that is producing the absolute worst connection lag I have ever experienced in a Call of Duty title on any platform.

    Between the performance issues, input lag on your mouse and controls during play, and the absolutely stark-terrible connection lag, it is nearly impossible to feel at all competitive in a multiplayer match even as a seasoned Call of Duty player. The competitive thrill is really the sole purpose and source of enjoyment for these titles, so without that, the game is just an exercise in futility and frustration. This is really the crux of my poor review for the game. Call of Duty games, to me, are all about the excitement of competitive twitch/tactical shooting--where you give up having the most impressive graphics or the biggest maps in exchange for great performance, low lag, and fantastic, tight controls--the things needed for purity of contest. If you take these few things away, the game becomes utterly worthless.

    Sledgehammer Games was working on a 3-year development cycle with access to some of the best budgets, talent, resources, and background knowledge to make a game using a 10-year old engine that was completely unambitious on it's face. And in spite of all this, all they could managed to push out when their release date rolled around was a glorified open beta with more issues than can be suffered to have fun playing. The only Call of Duty title that was released in a worse state was the infamous 'Ghosts,' which released to a chorus of bad reviews and was thoroughly called out as the poor effort it was by gamers and critics alike. Somehow, Advanced Warfare, a game similarly devoid of standards, seems to have been given a near-unanimous pass on everything that's wrong with it by all the mainstream critics--and even has a surprisingly (and perhaps even suspiciously) high level of positive player reviews on Steam.    … Expand
  3. Garian
    Jun 26, 2020
    4
    The multiplayer brings nothing new to Call of Duty apart from quicker movement and slightly more verticality. Every other mechanic is the same and there STILL aren't any dedicated servers, so your connection will never be optimal. The game is basically what Titanfall would have been if it was an unfinished release where you can't run on walls, and titans didn't exist. All of that beingThe multiplayer brings nothing new to Call of Duty apart from quicker movement and slightly more verticality. Every other mechanic is the same and there STILL aren't any dedicated servers, so your connection will never be optimal. The game is basically what Titanfall would have been if it was an unfinished release where you can't run on walls, and titans didn't exist. All of that being said... its call of duty. Its still fun every now and then.… Expand
  4. idohaker
    Jun 1, 2015
    4
    game is boring and exo suits are boring!!!!!! game is boring and exo suits are boring!!!!!! game is boring and exo suits are boring!!!!!! game is boring and exo suits are boring!!!!!!
  5. Division
    Nov 4, 2014
    4
    Unlike others, I'll explain why this game is bad.

    1) Netcode. It's the same as all previous CoDs, peer-to-peer "servers". Horrible latency causes people to seemingly die in 1 shot, while others get a huge advantage. It's their horrible netcode that tries to balance ping with play. It never works and never will. 2) Same old stuff, new look. Only now we can call it "CoD:    Unlike others, I'll explain why this game is bad.

    1) Netcode. It's the same as all previous CoDs, peer-to-peer "servers". Horrible latency causes people to seemingly die in 1 shot, while others get a huge advantage. It's their horrible netcode that tries to balance ping with play. It never works and never will.

    2) Same old stuff, new look. Only now we can call it "CoD: Titanfall edition". If you're looking for a skilled team game that takes good aim and situational awareness, this isn't it. People just fly around guns blazing all the time.

    3) "Classic" modes, where they take out the exo suit movement, brings it back down a notch to the skilled play area. If this mode catches on, it could make the experience much better.

    4) Posistional audio is horrible. On multiple tested headsets, including the Logitech G930 and the Psyko Audio 5.1 real sound sets, there is virtually no rear channels. Good luck hearing anyone behind you.

    5) Graphics are ok, but nothing new by any means. I play 4k with 3x GTX 980's in SLI. The game itself runs crisp and smooth but nothing to get excited over.

    So there you have it. Pretty much the same problems that plague older releases.....and why Acitivision / whoever makes it this year make no attempts to fix it is beyond my reasoning. Horrible netcode, monkeys flying around everywhere, same ole' same ole'.

    And for the love of buddah do not bother trying to snipe. It's like trying to swat a fly buzzing around your skull with a postage stamp.    … Expand
  6. Potitoman
    Nov 14, 2014
    4
    Whoo hoo! Another COD game, because god knows we don't get enough of these, do we?
    If you've played a COD game before then you've played them all. This is no exception except that now you some high tech toys that the game lets you play with when it feel generous. They almost feel like quick time events. Press "F" to use AMAZING TECHNOLOGY. You can't just start climbing walls or punching    Whoo hoo! Another COD game, because god knows we don't get enough of these, do we?
    If you've played a COD game before then you've played them all. This is no exception except that now you some high tech toys that the game lets you play with when it feel generous. They almost feel like quick time events. Press "F" to use AMAZING TECHNOLOGY. You can't just start climbing walls or punching through walls whenever you want. Oh no, that's reserved for special occasions, like when the you need to escape a tricky situation or simply break the monotony of shooting people or drones.

    Now everyone repeat after me, THEY ARE GOING TO INVADE AMERICA!. At least we know that Activision is committed to recycling because they keep reusing the same plot line over and over...
    Perhaps their fan base is made up entirely of American survivalists. I don't know.

    One thing that amuses me about these games is that you shoot, stab and kill everyone in the usual emotionless manner because it's ALL ABOUT REVENGE, YAAAAARRRR! But the second that a "good guy" dies, it gets all emotional and sentimental. It's all ridiculous and childish. By now I'm truly over this thumping 'Murican propaganda machine.    … Expand
  7. Jorchking
    Oct 27, 2020
    4
    Una campaña decente pero con un port a PC desastrozo: Muchos crasheos, stuttering, porteado desde consola, no han incluido el doblaje hispanoamericano en PC y es muy difícil configurar la sensibilidad de apuntado y demás opciones (hay que hacerlo desde el archivo y no se siente bien de todas formas).
    No comprar.
  8. Saratosa75
    Feb 18, 2015
    4
    I haven't played any CoD game since the original. So count me off, as someone who got sick of the CoD games over the years. Nope. I played BF, BF2, BF3, The last game I've played was "Bad Company 2", which I thought was fun and well made. So I said, what the hell...I'll give it a shot. Bought it with a big discount (50% off) and see what's the fuss is all about.
    So....I think, there    I haven't played any CoD game since the original. So count me off, as someone who got sick of the CoD games over the years. Nope. I played BF, BF2, BF3, The last game I've played was "Bad Company 2", which I thought was fun and well made. So I said, what the hell...I'll give it a shot. Bought it with a big discount (50% off) and see what's the fuss is all about.
    So....I think, there isn't much changed since the original CoD. Sure the graphics look better, but damn, this game is old! The way it plays is just so same like 10 years ago! They seem to be unable to innovate? Why is this still small claustrophobic maps, while the single player is a tunnel shooter? Predetermined paths and scripted events, dumb AI. I thought we were over this a long time ago!
    Graphics is one thing, but for c-st sake..innovate something already! I can't even imagine, that all the incarnations of this game over the years (I can't even count the CoD titles I skipped over the years) and - apparently- it's still the same? People need to stop buying this, because in the corporate gaming world, your wallet is your vote. Please do not spend money on this series, the developers and the distributor needs to get a clear message, that it's time to move on!    … Expand
  9. m0rb
    Nov 6, 2014
    4
    to make it short:

    it is the best CoD in years, those new mechanics are interesting, though nothing new or special... overall it is a slightly better CoD than the last dozen, BUT, IT REMAINS A MEDIOCRE SHOOTER! graphics are slightly more pleasing to the eye than CoD 4 (MW1)...which is a 10 year old game, mind you. "new" mechanics are nothing but copies of mechanics seen first in    to make it short:

    it is the best CoD in years, those new mechanics are interesting, though nothing new or special...
    overall it is a slightly better CoD than the last dozen, BUT, IT REMAINS A MEDIOCRE SHOOTER!
    graphics are slightly more pleasing to the eye than CoD 4 (MW1)...which is a 10 year old game, mind you.

    "new" mechanics are nothing but copies of mechanics seen first in "Crysis" and "Titanfall" - they are fun and breath new life in MP games, nevertheless, it remains a CoD ...I'll probably NEVER understand why they even bother to implement "different" guns... they ALL shoot the same!

    CoD isn't really a FPS - it's a reflex test ... basically, whoever shoots first, kills. aiming is optional, something like "skill" pretty much too, IMHO.

    I pirated the game for testing purposes - I am NOT going to buy it and after playing about 50% of the campaign, I deleted it (as I do with ALL games I pirate - either I buy, or I delete and in the case of CoD AW, it was latter).

    as I said in the beginning of my review: it is the_best CoD of 10 years ... and it still is ****    … Expand
  10. Dancuka
    Nov 7, 2014
    4
    A simple re-skin of the previous CODs. I cannot fathom how critics give this game almost perfect scores. Its not a bad game for sure, but its just the same as before with a double-jump. The campaign is OK but really predictable. MP is the same as before, and you might like that if it's your cup of tea.
  11. Orderan
    Dec 29, 2014
    4
    I don't know if this game can be called titanfall 1.5 (since it has more content in term of weapons) or titanfall beta (since the exo armor gameplay is less exploited).

    I am not going to going to talk about the fact that activision promised dedicated servers, giving a picture of a guy giving the finger would have been less straightforward than doing that. For the rest, it's still    I don't know if this game can be called titanfall 1.5 (since it has more content in term of weapons) or titanfall beta (since the exo armor gameplay is less exploited).

    I am not going to going to talk about the fact that activision promised dedicated servers, giving a picture of a guy giving the finger would have been less straightforward than doing that.

    For the rest, it's still Call Of Duty. The same graphic engine pushed even as it is writhing in pain on the floor agonizing. The same "shot-take cover-watch your allies discuss how screwed you are" campaign.The same gameplay of chosing the sames guns with different models that have been there for 10 years ,then rush into a deathmatch to have fun with your killstreak, etcaetera...

    Something that evolved so little (and not enough often in a good way) that if you have already a title from MW2 onward into your library, you should reconsider if Advanced Warfare is worth it)    … Expand
  12. BrumskiGriff
    Nov 4, 2014
    4
    Let me preface this review by stating I'm in my thirties and losing my reaction time faster than my hair. However I have played every iteration of COD and feel slightly more qualified to comment than a multitude of adolescents who claims this is the "Best COD ever" having only played Ghosts before AW.

    After the utter shambles that was COD Ghosts I wasn't expecting much from Advanced    Let me preface this review by stating I'm in my thirties and losing my reaction time faster than my hair. However I have played every iteration of COD and feel slightly more qualified to comment than a multitude of adolescents who claims this is the "Best COD ever" having only played Ghosts before AW.

    After the utter shambles that was COD Ghosts I wasn't expecting much from Advanced Warfare but like a moth to a flame I dutifully purchased AW hoping I wouldn't get burned.

    After merely minutes in single player it was immediately apparent this was a vast improvement on Ghosts. The game actually ran properly - no stuttering in the menu, the mouse actually moved where you wanted it to and it didn't take a fortnight to load each mission. Add to that the fact they've added a multitude of PC specific options in the menu and so far so good!

    Fast forward a couple of hours and I was really enjoying single player. It's a decent storyline, it looks good (as good as this engine can look) and sounds great. Maybe this years COD isn't going to be so bad after all?!?

    Then I tried multiplayer. On dear... Let me use an analogy - Take a room full of young children who suffer from hyperactivity. Sit them down and feed them copious amounts of full fat Coke, chocolate, and sweets with plenty of E numbers. Now let them outside to play nicely... Yeah chaos ensues! Some kids are running around in circles, some are climbing all over boxes, some are in trees, some keep sneaking up on you and kicking you in the shins. It's complete and utter chaos! That's pretty much multiplayer in Advanced Warfare.

    Any sense of strategy or tactics goes out the window the seconds that countdown hits zero. It's very much every man for himself as players bounce round the map in circles. Lining up a shot? Wait he's now bounced super gummy bear style behind you and stuck his first through your skull. Ok so you slowly get used to the fact it's no longer a case of looking in the "usual" spots and instead you spend just as much time looking at the sky as you do around corners but hey it's "different"!

    You should also note that while developers have confirmed dedicated servers are coming, quite why they're coming after release date I'm not sure, until then you're at the mercy of P2P. One minute you'll have four bars, the next one bar, and repeat..

    All in all it's a great single player campaign but, for this reviewer at least, a poor multiplayer game.    … Expand
  13. gipsylon
    Nov 7, 2014
    4
    I bought this only for multiplayer, completely don't care about the campaign. After 10 hours I can say multiplayer would be quite good with these new movement/exo features, new weapons like some laser gun, single shot sniper rifle, customizable kill streaks (for example killstreak can last longer or be more powerfull, but it requires more points to earn it), but it's ruined by unstableI bought this only for multiplayer, completely don't care about the campaign. After 10 hours I can say multiplayer would be quite good with these new movement/exo features, new weapons like some laser gun, single shot sniper rifle, customizable kill streaks (for example killstreak can last longer or be more powerfull, but it requires more points to earn it), but it's ruined by unstable online service - have difficulties connecting to it since launch and keep getting disconnected while playing.
    The P2P hosting is back (lovely host migration pause), so every game I see people with high pings and most of the time lag compensation puts me on huge disadvantage resulting in losing each confrontation. I shot enemy 2-3 times and killcams shows me not even shooting once.
    I find it frustrating that these people can spend millions on Kevin Spacey and advertising, but don't want to spend anything on server infrastructure. What this game really needs is lobby system that matches people based on their location and then assigns lobby to the closest free server.
    To sum it up, it's just another COD that will last one season (with PC version that might actually be one winter) and will be forgotten quickly.    … Expand
  14. crozakos
    Nov 11, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Ok, here we go again. I don't get how, according to the fans, "this one is better". I also really don't get how even if the game is set 40 years later, they still use the same guns. And the same uniforms. And the same techs. WHY? Why do these games have to be so bland and boring? I don't give a s#!t that a new Call of Duty game is released every year. It could be released every month for all I care. The things that annoy me are the lack of new content, the stupid design choices and the bland story mode, which has become some sort of training stages for new players, rather than a story mode. The story is the most lazy and predictable thing ever. Basicly country X attacks 'Murica and 'Murica fights back with a team of idiot soldiers. Basicly you are freedom fighter A and, with the help of freedom fighter B you kill anyone who isn't american. However freedom fighter B is killed and you escape. Then you join company Y and fight......................................wait for it......................Terrorists! Then you realise something and blah blah blah....

    I would review the multiplayer, but I think the next sentence summarizes it better:
    Lag, Lag and more lag. ALL THE LAG!    … Expand
  15. ultimadwarf
    Dec 11, 2014
    4
    Great gameplay, really different and interesting style. Horrible PC port.

    I have 8GB 1600Mhz RAM, an i5 4570 and an OCd 280X and can barely play this game on lowest settings at 720p. Horribly optimized.
  16. Nerdy_Dad
    Nov 4, 2014
    4
    The campaign is good but I have to say the graphics are terrible for a next gen title. The multiplayer is again just repackaged with a few different game modes. The jumping around is cool at first but gets old. There are sniper weapons but I have yet to find a spot to use one. Multiplayer is geared towards run and gunners only in my opinion
  17. Shadaobr
    Nov 7, 2014
    4
    6 hours of campaign, the PC version it's all crashed, CGIs with lag, sound and image desynchronized, poor history, multiplayer with HUGE lag. More of the same, but worst... I would be more happy if I had burned my money than buying this!
  18. Tekkers
    Nov 17, 2014
    4
    1.) If you are using an AMD graphics card, prepare to lower your settings as Advanced Warfare is a similar example to AC Unity where only Nvidia is cared for, while AMD is forgotten. To (sort of) fix the performance issues, you would either have to lower the quality, update the driver to 14.11, or use the power of the internet if you are still struggling.

    2.) There is still no dedicated    1.) If you are using an AMD graphics card, prepare to lower your settings as Advanced Warfare is a similar example to AC Unity where only Nvidia is cared for, while AMD is forgotten. To (sort of) fix the performance issues, you would either have to lower the quality, update the driver to 14.11, or use the power of the internet if you are still struggling.

    2.) There is still no dedicated servers so expect lag... and a lot of it. Nothing can be done here unfortunately.

    Multiplayer = fun but laggy
    Campaign = another campaign showing how fantastic the USA is at everything it does.    … Expand
  19. Camkey666
    Dec 3, 2014
    4
    While this call of duty isn't the worst of the franchise, it dosen't do much different once again, even with the exo suits. In the end they just end up as a way to escape more than anything. Again the game runs on a 10 year game engine and dosen't have any dedicated servers, along with cheap and worthless game mechanics.
  20. NachoGentile
    Dec 23, 2014
    4
    This game is well... A joke.

    Starting from the technical side: Let's suppose you bought the game, you install it and open the Single Player. The resolution is wrong, and you want to change it, but you can't! There's no "Settings" in your menu... Ok, let's play, New Game... And the intro video starts playing. A fairly long video that introduces you to the campaign. Then the video    This game is well... A joke.

    Starting from the technical side:
    Let's suppose you bought the game, you install it and open the Single Player. The resolution is wrong, and you want to change it, but you can't! There's no "Settings" in your menu... Ok, let's play, New Game... And the intro video starts playing. A fairly long video that introduces you to the campaign. Then the video finishes and the game is still loading. I have an SSD so I thought it was downloading some updates or something... Ok game starts, you go to options (now options exists), change the resolution, apply, and then boom! black screen, the intro video plays again, the whole game loads again, another long 2 minutes of loading. What is going on?? The only setting you can change without reloading the whole game is VSync!

    Once you configured the game and it performs ok you think you're ready to play... But it's just the beginning! the textures get weird, the game starts to be unplayable in some parts, there's stuttering, memory leaks, crashes, sometimes the whole computer crashes (that may be Windows 8 fault...). Then you start reading online or trying around disabling some settings. The conclusion: you will learn by hearth the dialogues of the intro video, I promise!

    Ok... aside from the technical problems... The graphics look like the game is 2 or 3 years old, Battlefield 4 released more than one year ago have by far better graphics. But graphics are not everything! that's true...

    About the single player: The campaign starts in a interesting way, it seems a cool game, but at some point random things that are not explained start to happen, it's like you missed a couple of chapters or something... You lose completely the story line.

    Another thing I don't like from this game is that some little things that make the game more realistic are not really accomplished. For example, collisions with dead bodies, you really pass through the bodies like they were ghosts. Or for example melee killing doesn't have a cool animation like many games today.

    AI, at least for me, is a very important from an FPS. In this game it feels like you are supposed to attack from a specific point of the level otherwise enemy bots, well.. They act weird, they don't know what to do, it's like... you are not supposed to be here! now what? sometimes they stare you, sometimes they kill you, sometimes they ignore you... I would expect something similar to Crysis 3, I know this game is not supposed to let you choose how and where you attack from, but at least the enemies would be able to react to a attack strategy change.

    I don't know, maybe I'm being to critic because I compare it with BF4, which also had a lot of bugs and technical problems some persisting today, but even if BF4 drove me mad with all the crashes, memory leak and incompatibility with Windows 8.1, it seems like a very achieved game compared to the PC version of Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare.

    I gave it a 4/10 because I found the multiplayer interesting and funny, futuristic weapons are cool and it reminds Quake because of some details. The double jump other kind of futuristic things you have give a game a cool online gameplay, that is a mix of Titanfall (except you can't run on walls :( ), Crysis 3 and Quake 3 Excessive mods.

    The conclusion is... It's a console port, a not really achieved one. Maybe better achieved than previous versions, ok, but not enough for PC players, who demand some minimum quality. It have a lot of graphic options yes, but it's because you need to tweak a lot the game for working on your rig and configuring the game is really painful. You feel stupid for spending the money on that game every time some error appears, and you expect for the budget of the game, a better story development during the campaign.

    I haven't played too long this game online but the times I did it took too long to make the matchmaking. Titanfall which is probably less played than CoD:AW is very fast finding a game, what's happening? I also read that there are several problems with the servers like lag and disconnecting that I haven't experienced yet.

    Don't buy this game on PC.    … Expand
  21. parttimegenius
    Jan 7, 2015
    4
    Been playing COD since the first installment (yes, I’m that old). Skipped Ghosts, but bought all the others, even though I started to like the franchise less and less. Tried Advanced Warfare for a good three weeks and have just uninstalled it. Here are my two cents:

    - Poor optimization for pc: slightly larger maps (roughly half of all the maps) lag intolerably for minutes on end. And    Been playing COD since the first installment (yes, I’m that old). Skipped Ghosts, but bought all the others, even though I started to like the franchise less and less. Tried Advanced Warfare for a good three weeks and have just uninstalled it. Here are my two cents:

    - Poor optimization for pc: slightly larger maps (roughly half of all the maps) lag intolerably for minutes on end. And yes, my system (decent i5, 32 Gb of Ram, SSD, Radeon R9 290) should be able to handle the game easily. Hell, all the other games (including the new Wolfenstein) do. When the lag settles (about five minutes in) the game is almost over. The lag never goes away completely, it just becomes less of an issue. At the start, it’s like wading through mud. In an iron suit. Turn shaders on (an in-game video setting) and you’re lag free. But in that case most maps won’t load. At all. Pick your favorite option. Rinse and repeat.

    - Poor optimization for pc: the lag compensation is laughable. The faster your connection, the more you will die. According to the killcam, you might even die standing up when you’re actually prone. Or die while in cover, when killcam shows you in the open. Et cetera.

    - Bad anti-cheat (if any). There are cheaters. Period.

    - Small maps: the map may look big at first, but they aren’t really. You move so fast this time around (thanks to the exo suit), even the larger maps take seconds to cross. That is, if you can overcome the ever present lag.

    - Unbalanced guns: the laser guns require no aim. Whatsoever. Say ‘bye’ to skill.

    - Poor patching choices. Instead of fixing (or even addressing) the lag issues, the developers decided to tweak some guns. I can live with that, since the balance was not all that great. So what they did, was make lasers stronger. That’s right, the already overpowered, no aim needed gun was made even stronger than it was in the first place. Now all pre-teens really have to use them.

    - Controllers are allowed on the pc. They have auto aim. Which sort of defeats the purpose of skill based shooters.

    - Because controllers are allowed, pitch and aim (turn-speed) are adjustable, not in game, but in the configuration. On many maps you will see people constantly doing 1260’s in the air, while they quickscope anything bigger than a flea with amazing ease. I wonder if that was supposed to happen.

    - You will get shot in the back. A lot. Sure; flanking has always been a valid tactic, but this time around, because of the extremely fast movement, the ability to do all kind of jumps (exo suit) and the poor map design (did I mention they are small?) most one on one gunfights end by being shot in the back. Not by the player you were fighting, but by someone else entirely. This accounts for about 60-75% of all the kills.

    - And, lastly, there are no dedicated servers.

    That’s about it. Try for yourself. Maybe you will like it. I did not.    … Expand
  22. Battletoad
    Mar 21, 2017
    4
    The gaming industry continues to roll into hell. Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare stupid shooter category C with backward graphics in which it's not fun to play.
  23. born28
    Sep 18, 2015
    4
    When this game isn't lagging its full of kids and full grown men with family's hacking it to bits. Snapping from one head shot to the next head shot, don't get me wrong there's fun to be had if you can avoid the lag and hackers good luck doing both!
  24. stupidcapslock
    May 15, 2016
    4
    I found that that this game really portrays how the CoD franchise has been declining. The campaign mode was relatively fun but clichéd- then again I wasn't expecting much going by past games. However, it was the multiplayer that I felt made the game as disappointing as it was; unbalanced and only a few guns that I felt were a viable option. The mechanic of supply drops also seemed veryI found that that this game really portrays how the CoD franchise has been declining. The campaign mode was relatively fun but clichéd- then again I wasn't expecting much going by past games. However, it was the multiplayer that I felt made the game as disappointing as it was; unbalanced and only a few guns that I felt were a viable option. The mechanic of supply drops also seemed very cheap to me and I hope that the trend of microtransactions in games like this doesn't continue. As usual, the zombies mode was fun for a while but I couldn't help but notice that no trial of exo zombies is available in proper before buying the maps through packs or the season pass - something that would have been helpful, especially with the inclusion of a new movement system that many people did not like.
    Personally, I'm not too fussed about the graphics and I found the maps much brighter than previous instalments, which in my opinion is a good thing - one of the only real positive features of the game as well as the high quality voice acting in campaign.    … Expand
  25. LightPoth
    Jan 24, 2018
    4
    2018 oh nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo not Kevin Spacey oh nooooooooooooooooooooooo
  26. Taylord99
    Aug 15, 2018
    4
    Overall a bad game. Not much to say here. The story is extremely silly and the multiplayer is average.
  27. Shimmeywill
    Feb 26, 2020
    4
    Change of gun design and aesthetic doesn't do the drawn out franchise any favours. A mediocre experience.
  28. Genek13
    Nov 15, 2019
    4
    This game looks like this - jumping like an idiot through entire map to kill everybody on the map (no tactis, just jump and shoot)
    I was so pissed after few hours in MP...
  29. Ansatsu83
    Nov 8, 2014
    3
    They copied so much, from other franchises, that the game is not unique. It is very clear that this game is a quick cash in. Very short list of other games they copied, HAWX (story line with one or two minor changes), Ghost Recon Future Soldier (every gadget, in the game), battlefield 2142 (hover tank and battle linked ui), Frontlines fuel of war (first example of drones in games)... AllThey copied so much, from other franchises, that the game is not unique. It is very clear that this game is a quick cash in. Very short list of other games they copied, HAWX (story line with one or two minor changes), Ghost Recon Future Soldier (every gadget, in the game), battlefield 2142 (hover tank and battle linked ui), Frontlines fuel of war (first example of drones in games)... All of the listed games are better than this one! Just not worth 60 dollars.… Expand
  30. Psy_pmP
    Nov 20, 2014
    3
    The worst part of the series. Silly scripted scenes. Ugly design wrapped in modern shaders. Very small and short levels. Physics is completely absent. Dumb gameplay. I could not even go through with it. The last part I liked more.
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

85
#85 Best PC Game of 2014
24
#24 Most Discussed PC Game of 2014
59
#59 Most Shared PC Game of 2014

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
78

Generally favorable reviews - based on 18 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 18
  2. Mixed: 2 out of 18
  3. Negative: 1 out of 18
  1. CD-Action
    Jan 9, 2015
    85
    This game is a lot of fun. There’s some Crysis in it, some Titanfall, some elements borrowed from Unreal Tournament and Battlefield. Underneath it’s still Call of Duty though, finally modernized in terms of visuals. [13/2014, p.50]
  2. PC PowerPlay
    Dec 23, 2014
    80
    It's the best Call of Duty campaign in years, and the multiplayer continues to scratch a certain itch. [Jan 2015, p.64]
  3. GameWatcher
    Dec 14, 2014
    80
    A new engine and new ideas breath new life into a series that was in serious danger of turning stale.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »