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. Banhammer0
    Nov 26, 2014
    6
    If Black Ops 2 and Titanfall had a baby it would be Advanced Warfare.
    You have almost the same (no wallrun sadly) moves available but with all the mechanics and style of CoD.
    Pros: - Exo-moves are fun - Optimization is very good for a CoD game, equal to BLOPS 2 - Create-a-class in this CoD is the best so far - Crates dropping weapon variants and clothing for your character is a fun    If Black Ops 2 and Titanfall had a baby it would be Advanced Warfare.
    You have almost the same (no wallrun sadly) moves available but with all the mechanics and style of CoD.
    Pros:
    - Exo-moves are fun
    - Optimization is very good for a CoD game, equal to BLOPS 2
    - Create-a-class in this CoD is the best so far
    - Crates dropping weapon variants and clothing for your character is a fun addition
    Unfortunately this CoD has some major issues
    Cons:
    - Kill streaks are the LEAST FUN in any CoD game released so far (very hard to get and just...weak)
    - CHEATERS !!!!! Those **** 12-year olds who fukd your mom last night are back with a vengeance. Not as bad as MW 3 but enough to make me sick of playing it.
    - Item progression is kinda bad, some challenges required for certain attachments and camoes are very grindy, and there is no reason for it

    Not a bad CoD title but I may go back to BLOPS 2 after a while, killstreaks ruin it for me. This CoD is just not nearly as rewarding. 6/10    … Expand
  2. Garfoodle
    Nov 22, 2014
    6
    Its not bad, nor is it good. It works on PC, is fun, in that CoD sort of way, has good facial animations and Kevin Spacey. While it wont change your outlook on CoD, its still enjoyable for those who are into this kind of game.
  3. Jetpil0t
    Nov 7, 2014
    6
    The absence of dedicated servers on PC once again makes this yet another multiplayer disappointment. This is by the far the single biggest reason to avoid this game on the PC on principle and in practice.
    The single player I found to be typically derivative from previous titles in it's level design and story (so expect nothing new here) however this time however it has included (and to a    The absence of dedicated servers on PC once again makes this yet another multiplayer disappointment. This is by the far the single biggest reason to avoid this game on the PC on principle and in practice.
    The single player I found to be typically derivative from previous titles in it's level design and story (so expect nothing new here) however this time however it has included (and to a much more subdued extent) mechanics borrowed from other shooters. These additional mechanics offer very minor, but welcome improvements to the single player gameplay overall, but you could play the respective source material and enjoy these various mechanics to a much fuller extent through significantly better single player experiences, so there implementation here with no real innovation doesn't feel worth while overall.
    Visually it looks superior to Ghosts, but by about as much as each COD game generally improves visuals every year. Certainly the visuals put on show in the trailers are from pre-rendered cut scenes, which look significantly better than the game play, even maxed out on PC, which is fairly misleading.
    It does however run significantly better and comes with plenty of quality settings, which is a welcome change.
    Many reviewers have touted these improvements to really freshen up the series, however this is only because the series suffered from extremely derivative and repetitive content for so many years. On it's own it is the iterative improvement each new installment should be, but offers nothing revolutionary like United Offensive or Modern Warfare did back in the series prime.
    This game sits above many of the series worst entries, but falls significantly shorter of the series highs.
    I wouldn't recommend this on PC if you are interested in the multiplayer, you don't have any dedicated servers and so much like Ghosts the community will be next to nonexistent in only a few months. I wouldn't recommend the single player on it's own especially for the full retail price. If you are interested in what's here, Crysis Warhead is very similar and significantly more enjoyable and well made single player game and it also has the advantage of looking better than Advanced Warfare, despite it's age.
    Overall I wouldn't recommend this installment, the lack of dedicated servers and ho-hum single player do nothing to justify the price or stand out from the last few installments overall.
    Perhaps a return to WW2 that focuses on core mechanics is what the series needs to really deliver once again. Or perhaps it's finished and it's time to move onto other more innovative franchises, only time will tell.
    6/10    … Expand
  4. lee020
    Nov 10, 2014
    6
    For me the COD series is moving too far away from it roots,I used to love it's simplicity, and it was in this simplicity came the exciting playability. Now it is more about remembering how to get the grenade you want, or timing the double jump. In COD I want to be thinking about the tactics not the button pushing.

    Also for me it's another game ruined by being console ported. Was I    For me the COD series is moving too far away from it roots,I used to love it's simplicity, and it was in this simplicity came the exciting playability. Now it is more about remembering how to get the grenade you want, or timing the double jump. In COD I want to be thinking about the tactics not the button pushing.

    Also for me it's another game ruined by being console ported. Was I the only one who had to pause the game to search the internet on how to slide at a cruicial moment because the only help I got in game was "Push to slide?

    It's ok, but please less Halo and more COD next time.    … Expand
  5. firefalcon124
    Nov 12, 2014
    6
    While Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare is an improvement from the horror which Ghosts was, the developers of this franchise needs to do better than this to bring Call of Duty back to its glory days.
    On a positive note, the PC port is good, and the multi-player is no half shabby thanks to the new "exo-suits".
    The biggest improvement needs to come from the Singleplayer. I beat it in as    While Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare is an improvement from the horror which Ghosts was, the developers of this franchise needs to do better than this to bring Call of Duty back to its glory days.
    On a positive note, the PC port is good, and the multi-player is no half shabby thanks to the new "exo-suits".

    The biggest improvement needs to come from the Singleplayer. I beat it in as little as 5 hours, running past NPCs on the hardest difficulty mode. The campaign is once again a whole "MURICA SAVES THE WORLD" explosion fest, which I'm personally starting to get sick of.

    This can be the start of a turnaround for Call of Duty, but a lot remains to be improved.    … Expand
  6. UnOffical
    Jan 24, 2015
    6
    The call of duty series has always been a strange one. Call of duty 4 was brilliant, and was (in my personal opinion) one of the best COD games ever made. MW2 was highly anticipated, and did an OK job at expanding the story line and improving multiplayer by a considerable amount. One of the first "Off topic" call of duty games was World At War, which changed the whole way COD was played.The call of duty series has always been a strange one. Call of duty 4 was brilliant, and was (in my personal opinion) one of the best COD games ever made. MW2 was highly anticipated, and did an OK job at expanding the story line and improving multiplayer by a considerable amount. One of the first "Off topic" call of duty games was World At War, which changed the whole way COD was played. Advanced warfare is a modern World at war. It has drastically changed the way COD is played, in good (and bad) ways. Many people have became highly critical of this game due to it's new features. Because of this, AW has developed a sort of "Love/Hate" Relationship with its fans. I think that sledgehammer took a huge risk with this game- which was unexpected, due most cod games being the same thing, but with different things in them. Call of duty is a lot like a sandwich. The concept is the bread, and the series/title is the filling. The bread stays the same, but the filling changes. They have changed the bread to flatbread for this game.
    The campaign lacks replay ability. It's very short too. Engine is very old, and it's turning into titanfall.
    If you're a die hard COD fan and you have the money spare, this is a decent buy. If you've never played COD games before, give this one a miss- it's nothing like its predecessors.    … Expand
  7. NatT96
    Jul 6, 2015
    6
    This game was painfully poorly optimized requiring an extreme amount of power for PC's. I mean this lags on mid graphics cars and even high ones as well with massive frame drops and oh boy, every single review is correct, having dedicated servers is a must for the price I paid for this title, its so gosh darn bad....this is the last COD game for me.
  8. moonlaba
    Jan 17, 2022
    6
    여러 스타 배우를 고용한다고 없던 캐릭터성이 생기진 않는다는점.. 근현대물인건 신선했지만 여러 슈트의 능력들이 1회용으로 그것도 별로 유용하게도 쓰이지 않는다는점이 아쉽다.
  9. r03vg
    Apr 15, 2020
    6
    Одна из последних ролей Кевина Спейси. Все еще та самая старая Call of Duty с мыльными текстурами. Хороший звук, интересная история.
  10. vova22379
    Dec 18, 2021
    6
    ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
  11. fl3shy
    Nov 6, 2014
    5
    I just don't get why people like these games. I haven't played one since Modern Warfare 1- and it really seems like nothing has improved. In fact it feels worse than I remember those games. Slammer maps, less depth in gameplay, story / progression mechanics that lack depth, and laughable tactics / strategy.

    If you enjoy running from set piece to set piece, hiding behind cars as you pick    I just don't get why people like these games. I haven't played one since Modern Warfare 1- and it really seems like nothing has improved. In fact it feels worse than I remember those games. Slammer maps, less depth in gameplay, story / progression mechanics that lack depth, and laughable tactics / strategy.

    If you enjoy running from set piece to set piece, hiding behind cars as you pick off wave after wave of enemies, then this game is for you. If you love pre-scripted quick time events, this game is for you. If you have a hard on for drones, this game is for you. If you have been a COD lover for the last 10 years, this game is for you. Otherwise, there are way better offerings; it's the golden age of PC gaming and we don't have to support this garbage.    … Expand
  12. Avadon
    Nov 3, 2014
    5
    Technically, the game is well optimized but the multiplayer does suffer from some occasional network stuttering. It's in a far better state than Ghosts though, that's for sure. Single player is as short as always and pretty meh. Gameplay is CoD but slightly faster with some mobility and exosuit techniques, and with a lot of weapons and customization. I think it's appropriate to compare itTechnically, the game is well optimized but the multiplayer does suffer from some occasional network stuttering. It's in a far better state than Ghosts though, that's for sure. Single player is as short as always and pretty meh. Gameplay is CoD but slightly faster with some mobility and exosuit techniques, and with a lot of weapons and customization. I think it's appropriate to compare it to Titanfall now, since that's the direction they are moving in, and I'd say that Titanfall is definitely more fun. CoD:AW does not have as good and memorable map design as Titanfall, movement is much slower, graphics are worse and of course there are no Titans. Also the "parkour" in CoD is quite a bit clunkier than Titanfall's, you will smash into walls constantly while boosting and overall it doesn't feel as cool and organic as Titanfall's. Yes, it has a ton of weapons, but most of them are bad and nobody ever uses them. In conclusion, CoD:AW is a step in the right direction and an improvement in some areas, but I don't expect it will hold my interest any longer than Titanfall since it's overall weaker, and they're essentially charging 100$ for this. It's definitely not worth that amount of money in my opinion.… Expand
  13. Merr
    Nov 10, 2014
    5
    I was sceptic about this CoD. Last CoD, that i bought was Black Ops 1, and this one is pretty good.
    I love this new jumps and so on. I think it's much better than Titanfall which is pretty "slow" game.

    Some preformance problems on my PC(i5 2500k, GTX 770, 8GB RAM), but they are not big problem.
  14. Hseeker25
    Nov 14, 2014
    5
    Campaign is very good but very predictable, multiplayer sadly again with very small boxed map making it even smaller now since you can jump all over, also insta death who shoots first is still in, mechs arent as impressive as titanfall, just average but overal just good for a few hours of boredom.
  15. Horridus
    Nov 12, 2014
    5
    Decent single player campaign but too short about 4 hours , but action packed and one of the better call of duty single player campaign in the last few years.

    Graphics is a strange feeling , half of the game looks really good like the weapons, faces, lights and smoke , but the other half like background, water and houses looks like i am playing a PS2 game 10 yeas ago ! Activison    Decent single player campaign but too short about 4 hours , but action packed and one of the better call of duty single player campaign in the last few years.

    Graphics is a strange feeling , half of the game looks really good like the weapons, faces, lights and smoke , but the other half like background, water and houses looks like i am playing a PS2 game 10 yeas ago !

    Activison doesnt want to pay for a new graphics engine ??

    The multiplayer portion of the game is really crap, seriously it is just a tiny bit better than cod ghost.
    there are allready hackers , and the gun damage is strangely random, huge lag spikes and the fastest leveling system in the world...

    So i am left with a 50/50 experience , the single player is allright but too short and the multiplayer
    is ****

    so i feel like Activision is really milking the cow with the lastest cod titles and thats really sad because there is potential if the programmers didnt felt rushed, maybe release a new cod game every 2 years instead of these half hearted games.    … Expand
  16. nwoslave
    Nov 9, 2014
    5
    I rented this game for two days and the following is my impression of it after playing on my ps3.
    there is no way this took three years to make.
    Hard freezes at various moments mainly either in party lobby or in game lobby. 2 second game freezes while shooting and normal movement mic display placement gets in the way of viewing the battlefield because they put it on some 16bit    I rented this game for two days and the following is my impression of it after playing on my ps3.
    there is no way this took three years to make.

    Hard freezes at various moments mainly either in party lobby or in game lobby.
    2 second game freezes while shooting and normal movement
    mic display placement gets in the way of viewing the battlefield because they put it on some 16bit resolution and just outside of center screen.
    slow button response while in party or game lobby
    1. closing after action report
    2. Change load out
    3. While leaving game
    4. Opening supply caches

    Matchmaking clearly is broken. worst lag in any COD game ever and im not using hyperbole.
    game starts feel like you were thrown into it. no more countdown and start at same time.
    no difference in amount of bullets it takes to die in HC and Core modes
    takes almost 30 seconds for the find game button to display and allow searching
    gun fx sounds are flat and no difference between them.
    There is little to no recoil in the guns.
    lack of guns.
    some op guns.
    perks are stupid. you will run a couple of them for all ten setups.
    almost all exo perks are useless and do not power back up in the event you can survive insta-kills after using up all the energy it takes to use them.
    new items and the gun pictures take forever to display
    customization items with time limits are stupid
    colors are flat and muted, no one can be seen even on the brightest maps.
    maps are decent and small definitely more chaotic with people able to jump up behind you.
    campers are far and few between.
    re-spawn has a limbo mode where you’re not really spawned but in some spectator mode while playing CORE mode.
    QS is still around

    i highly suggest renting first. DO NOT SPEND MONEY ON THIS GAME UPFRONT.
    i would have given it a lower score but i think the jetpacks are good addition and provide a new dynamic to the game.    … Expand
  17. james2003
    Nov 15, 2014
    5
    What it gives with one hand it takes away with the other and that seems to be the theme that runs through. You are this super solider with an exo-suit, but it only allows you to experience super human abilities in very constricted ways. You can only climb walls at certain points, you can only use shields at certain points, and the only relatively free reign is the powered jump.

    Missions    What it gives with one hand it takes away with the other and that seems to be the theme that runs through. You are this super solider with an exo-suit, but it only allows you to experience super human abilities in very constricted ways. You can only climb walls at certain points, you can only use shields at certain points, and the only relatively free reign is the powered jump.

    Missions are short, story is weak, and characters are forgettable. I almost feel sorry for Kevin Spacey being involve in this, and most of time he is the only driving force in the story. But perhaps that's just me... as I have played every game in this series and there is nothing new to offer. Or perhaps that it's time for Activision to either get really creative or drop it.

    Gameplay is interrupted by the inclusion of button tapping moments. While the idea is good the method has been over used. This means that game play feels choppy, as you have to drop everything and match key presses with on screen instructions. Then there are parts of the story it just glosses over and downright ignores. In my books it's the worst crime because it assumes that people are stupid and insults them greatly.

    Gameplay there really isn't anything new here, and what parts that are new are so briefly used that it's instantly forgettable. You get to use stealth suits, climb walls, fall from great heights, grapple hooks ... but sadly all of it makes up less than 5% of single player game. Some great ideas but poorly executed just like the direction of Crysis. The game gives you superhuman abilities then forces you to use a gun, so expect for the most part to be frustrated and disappointed.

    But what I can't understand is the Professional Critics, what game where they playing... I'd like to know? Current score is 77 by them and 4.6 by users, have they lost touch, or has silver crossed their palms?
    The good things are grenades, some really clever features, but again they over complicate it with the keys you have to press to select them. I don't know who designed the key layout, but it has to be some contortionist that was born with six fingers. Everything feels wrong which means sadly you end up shooting everything in your way using little of the "added" features that AW boosts so proudly about.

    Then there are level cut screens which would be a good time to load the mission in. Clever and has been used in games for decades, but for whatever reason it loads half, waits until the movie has finished then loads the second half. Why? Also you have to watch the movie, without being able to skip, this becomes an issue when you have finished a level. Where you have to watch the proceeding level clip before you are able to quit the game, this seem silly for whatever reason they decided to do this for? Then when you start the game, you have to watch the same clip again.

    Can't comment on Multiplayer, which I haven't played, and Activation probably thanks me for.
    I am giving this a score of 5; I think it more than fair perhaps a little generous at times. Though I can't say I really enjoyed it, there wasn't a big moment where I refused to play it. It was just average, maybe a little less, and that's the biggest shame of it all. It could have done so much better.    … Expand
  18. Costs1129
    Nov 3, 2014
    5
    Not horrible... but not that good either. If you liked Ghosts then you will ignore the bad map design, lagging, and monotony of this new title. The only word that keeps coming to mind is "meh." A lot of the new mechanics seem fun at first, until you realize they are almost more of a liability than not. Nothing has changed to drove people away from the corner hugging circle camping thatNot horrible... but not that good either. If you liked Ghosts then you will ignore the bad map design, lagging, and monotony of this new title. The only word that keeps coming to mind is "meh." A lot of the new mechanics seem fun at first, until you realize they are almost more of a liability than not. Nothing has changed to drove people away from the corner hugging circle camping that dominates so many other COD titles. I may consider changing my score as weapon unlocks either reiconfroce this monotony (lowering my score) or overcomes it (raising my score).… Expand
  19. tormentor55
    Nov 11, 2014
    5
    COD Advanced Warfare is better than ghosts. it really is, but you can't get worse than ghosts. Whenever I look at the game I see Titanfall and black-light Retribution written all over it. While black light is a mixed bag, it's freemium model becomes tolerable after the 5 dollar pass. (which i mentioned in my review for the ps4 port.) PC people should rejoice since the freemium on the PCCOD Advanced Warfare is better than ghosts. it really is, but you can't get worse than ghosts. Whenever I look at the game I see Titanfall and black-light Retribution written all over it. While black light is a mixed bag, it's freemium model becomes tolerable after the 5 dollar pass. (which i mentioned in my review for the ps4 port.) PC people should rejoice since the freemium on the PC version is only for skins and doesn't require 5 bucks. Better to spend 5 bucks on black light for ps4 or free on PC. (plus since black-light is free, no PS plus required.) The cost for COD AW: $60(actual game) $50-$60(PS plus) and more money for DLC.
    Cost for Black light: $0(To play) $5(To unlock guns permanently, one time fee, free on PC.) $0 (For multiplayer fees).
    I understand that this review is mentioning black-light a lot but that's what AW is essentially a $60 dollar Black light, Titanfall and Crysis with the crappy Call of Duty repetition. AW isn't as **** as people say it is. It's just not worth the price considering how the final product compares to the hype and their are superior alternatives that either cost the same or are cheaper. EX: Battlefield.
    AW is closest to fresh air that the franchise has gotten in MW2. the problem is that it's not fresh enough.    … Expand
  20. bvenjamin
    Dec 17, 2014
    5
    I haven't played this game but it seems my review will be as informative as all the ones already uploaded.

    upvote if u never want to see a useful review again
  21. global_1995
    Jan 1, 2015
    5
    garbage game, not too many things i can control in the game that we should be able to, its like theyre teasing us, keep on getting "loading" in the middle of intense scenes, not very realistic, good graphics horrible recticles and dont ever get back up from my "team" in campaign. i thought call of duty wouldve stepped it up
  22. Nerosoma889
    Feb 10, 2016
    5
    Looked forward to this, but disappointed me straight away, so much so that I was not even interested in the zombie DLC, which is quite rare for me. The graphics were horrendous for my above average PC (770 / i5 / 8GB), but was later fixed with some troubleshooting and online tutorials (thanks CODAW). Overall, story was quite mild, however, I like how levels are non-linear in some cases,Looked forward to this, but disappointed me straight away, so much so that I was not even interested in the zombie DLC, which is quite rare for me. The graphics were horrendous for my above average PC (770 / i5 / 8GB), but was later fixed with some troubleshooting and online tutorials (thanks CODAW). Overall, story was quite mild, however, I like how levels are non-linear in some cases, and was probably the best part of the entire campaign.

    The multiplayer was your bog standard COD, no real difference apart from the movement system, which became boring and quite annoying as time went on.    … Expand
  23. gold
    Jun 2, 2018
    5
    Даже на минимальных настройках лагало, не возможно было играть (ближе к концу игры перестало). Сюжет - 9, Графика - минимальная графика на 5, геймплей - 4.
  24. dggt
    Mar 9, 2023
    5
    покращилася тільки графіка, і то погано оптимізована, сетінг трешовий й не цікавий, стрільба нудна, сюжет тухлий, вдосталь халтури для ААА проекту, пукалка на вечір під пивко
  25. Nameless2131
    Feb 6, 2020
    5
    5/10 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
  26. hileger
    Oct 29, 2022
    5
    Пиздец какого гавно стрельба как из игрушечных пистолетиков лагает на 2070 игра 2014 года хуеплеты , да таже гост на уровне была ,а это просто мусор
  27. Greek_objektife
    Jun 9, 2021
    5
    Получилась намного лучше чем Ghosts,сюжет хоть и туп,но неплохо написан,графика была кардинально улучшена и геймплей благодаря сеттингу будущего стал поразнообразнее но мультиплеер полное говно и зомби режим скучный
  28. bar0yka
    Dec 29, 2022
    5
    sıkıcı grafikler aynı bazı yerlerde hata veriyor ve hikaye leş .
  29. Murdockk
    Jun 27, 2023
    5
    Genel call of duty çizgilerinin dışına çıkmış bir oyundu. Oyuna bir yenilik getirip daha gelecek vari bir oyun yapmışlardı. Beni de pek sarmamıştı açıkçası
  30. 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
  31. 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
  32. 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
  33. 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!!!!!!
  34. 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
  35. 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
  36. 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.
  37. 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
  38. 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
  39. 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.
  40. 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
  41. 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
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. 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.
  45. 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
  46. 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!
  47. 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
  48. 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.
  49. 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
  50. 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
  51. 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.
  52. 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!
  53. 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
  54. LightPoth
    Jan 24, 2018
    4
    2018 oh nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo not Kevin Spacey oh nooooooooooooooooooooooo
  55. Taylord99
    Aug 15, 2018
    4
    Overall a bad game. Not much to say here. The story is extremely silly and the multiplayer is average.
  56. Shimmeywill
    Feb 26, 2020
    4
    Change of gun design and aesthetic doesn't do the drawn out franchise any favours. A mediocre experience.
  57. 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...
  58. 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
  59. 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.
  60. Trytobefair
    Nov 9, 2014
    3
    Hello dear Gamers, first of all, I would like to take a view on the system requirements for this game. Lag free, with all graphical features enabled costs roughly 2k up to 3k Dollars invest into your hardware, plus the 60$ for the game. What do you get for this amount: Skilled players need 3 hrs for single campaign. Mostly you need that time for the long loading times, even when you haveHello dear Gamers, first of all, I would like to take a view on the system requirements for this game. Lag free, with all graphical features enabled costs roughly 2k up to 3k Dollars invest into your hardware, plus the 60$ for the game. What do you get for this amount: Skilled players need 3 hrs for single campaign. Mostly you need that time for the long loading times, even when you have installed CODAW onto your SSD-drive. After that done you realize that you bought a laggy, peer-to-peer multiplayer network game with a seriously bad collision query responses. Is it 2060$ up to 3060$ worth it? Well, this game has its amazing graphical moments, it has its new shield armory, jump around moments, a tiny skill system plus they lent from Batman the grappling hook, but unfortunately, no its not worth 60$ plus the massive amount of hardware invest, because the only reason for buying this game was the dedicated server feature and they messed it up by just using a peer-to-peer client network - what a big big mistake.… Expand
  61. regimechange
    Dec 27, 2014
    3
    A decent revamp of an already tired series. The new gadgets and tricks for more mobility help some with the multiplayer quality, but its nothing I haven't seen done better in other games before. 3/10 for effort.

    Also, still no dedicated servers, and the game is so unoptimized its ridiculous. I can play Ryse: Son of Rome on max but not CODAW?
  62. Shinigami_UA
    Nov 6, 2014
    3
    This review is for Multiplayer part only. The game isn't too bad, its fun to play, weapons seem more-or less balanced but its not all good. First, host-peer system, where your host may end up being very slow and your game being bad because of them. Second, everyone moves at an insane speed, its hard to aim at people now, especially when they dolpin dive under you or simply jump in yourThis review is for Multiplayer part only. The game isn't too bad, its fun to play, weapons seem more-or less balanced but its not all good. First, host-peer system, where your host may end up being very slow and your game being bad because of them. Second, everyone moves at an insane speed, its hard to aim at people now, especially when they dolpin dive under you or simply jump in your face. Its new experience, and its interesting, but not perfect. Next: cheaters are obvious like never since SECOND DAY AFTER RELEASE! If not cheaters, this game would be quite interesting to me, although I ended up not using any killstreaks other than UAV - they just get in the way or require too many points.
    My main issue was and remains not willing to play with cheaters, if this was cheat-free, I'd give this game 6 points (weapons are so "balanced" they all feel the same, like, there's no difference between them, and these exo moves, I don't like them too much considering how limiting the maps are - out of bounds warnings everywhere, or you simply die by getting out of the map). This isn't how Call of Duty was, or how it should be, in my opinion.    … Expand
  63. Ghoster
    Nov 10, 2014
    3
    Better than COD's from last 3-4 years but that doesn't mean game is good. Didn't have problems with performance but graphics is still pretty bad even in ultra settings, specially trees which looks like in games 10 years ago (watch trees etc. when you descend from the cliff). They did a lot of effort to change gameplay from standard COD which improve game a little. Most annoying thing inBetter than COD's from last 3-4 years but that doesn't mean game is good. Didn't have problems with performance but graphics is still pretty bad even in ultra settings, specially trees which looks like in games 10 years ago (watch trees etc. when you descend from the cliff). They did a lot of effort to change gameplay from standard COD which improve game a little. Most annoying thing in campaign are long story sequences which are impossible to skip. Probably feature which is there just to make more "playing" hours.… Expand
  64. TechoPank
    Nov 3, 2014
    3
    This game has no changes in the visual components, the graphics are very horrible, the characters are a plastic dolls. Not to mention that the game engine does not support tessellation. For 2 years of Development SS the game has small changes.....
  65. OutlawTX
    Nov 8, 2014
    3
    I think that this has to be the worst COD yet. The dialog, acting, and CGI graphics are great but that's about all the good I can say about it. For the bad, a predictable, overdone plot with loads of button trigger prompts. After 3 of the 6 hours of the campaign I was just playing to be done with it. Multiplayer has been turned into a game of chance where you're in a constant state ofI think that this has to be the worst COD yet. The dialog, acting, and CGI graphics are great but that's about all the good I can say about it. For the bad, a predictable, overdone plot with loads of button trigger prompts. After 3 of the 6 hours of the campaign I was just playing to be done with it. Multiplayer has been turned into a game of chance where you're in a constant state of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. You're in an almost constant state of being exposed to enemy fire whether it's behind, above, below ,or flank. After being spawned 5 times in a row in someone crosshairs in the second round that I've played, I'm already trading this garbage in today. Seeing as how Activision and their devs have completely lost any ability to develop a decent COD game, I say they'd be better off just remaking MW2. I'd like to throw out a hearty FU to IGN for being instrumental in me wasting $60 of my hard earned money.… Expand
  66. mikhailmaldonag
    Dec 6, 2014
    3
    El juego es en sí termino medio, le pondría un 5 si es que funcionará mejor. Lastimosamente tiene algunos problemas de configuración. Algunas opciones gráficas no están bien configuradas y cargar 5 minutos de video cada vez que se hace una configuración arruina bastante el comienzo del juego.

    La jugabilidad, el exo, la acción y la mira con el mouse están muy bien logrados, por tal    El juego es en sí termino medio, le pondría un 5 si es que funcionará mejor. Lastimosamente tiene algunos problemas de configuración. Algunas opciones gráficas no están bien configuradas y cargar 5 minutos de video cada vez que se hace una configuración arruina bastante el comienzo del juego.

    La jugabilidad, el exo, la acción y la mira con el mouse están muy bien logrados, por tal motivo el juego no puede llevar un cero.

    Kevin Spacy le da otro punto y la historia no es tan mala pero si muy predecible, ni una sorpresa. si esperan algo memorable como el MW1-2 o el BO1-2 se van a llevar una decepción muy grande. Mejor no esperar nada y así se lleva otro punto en historia.

    El multiplayer no anda, así que un juego multijugador pierde la mitad de sus puntos al no funcionar (-5 puntos por eso)

    Total 3 puntos: 1 historia, 1 jugabilidad y 1 entretenimiento (kevin spacy entretiene y la acción de momentos es muy divertida)

    Observación: el juego es muuuuucho más lento que Titanfall, los que busquen adrenalina mejor prueben el otro.    … Expand
  67. kwilks3
    Apr 1, 2015
    3
    I buy COD games for multi-player only, so I can only comment on that aspect of the game. That being said, I didn't buy this game, it was a gift. After all us PC gamers got ripped off buying an incomplete shoddy port of Ghosts, I vowed never to buy anymore IW versions of this game, and now I can add Sledgehammer Games to that list.

    Pro's - The game is beautiful. Graphics are a solid    I buy COD games for multi-player only, so I can only comment on that aspect of the game. That being said, I didn't buy this game, it was a gift. After all us PC gamers got ripped off buying an incomplete shoddy port of Ghosts, I vowed never to buy anymore IW versions of this game, and now I can add Sledgehammer Games to that list.

    Pro's -
    The game is beautiful. Graphics are a solid 9+.

    Most of the movement is fluid, and most of the weapons feel balanced.

    The customization of the avatar's outfit and Exo is a nice touch

    Con's -
    P2P, after repeatedly being told that the game would have dedicated servers, that simply is not the case... again. This game has so much potential, but is hindered greatly without dedicated servers. This leads into problems in many areas, and a major issue is the lag compensation. One game I'll have ok hit detection, then the next I'll squeeze off 4-5 bullets directly on target, and not one will register. This leads to whoever I'm shooting at to hear me fire, turn and return fire and kill me with bullet. Spectating your team will also display this behavior in lag comp, and leads to a ton of warranted complaining.

    The spawn system needs to be reworked. You will literally spawn right in front of the enemy, making it super easy to be killed. I've spawned several time in the middle of a group of the opposing team, which always results in me being killed again instantly, and usually the enemy will get a team kill or two in the process.

    The maps are decent size for players without exo suits, but since all players have them, it makes the maps feel really small.

    DLC... there are a few issues here. First is the fact that Microsoft and Activision are in bed with each other, and have a deal worked out where Xbox gets any DLC 1 month before the other platforms, which IMO is a dumb practice that alienates everyone else that paid good money for the game too. Why are we be penalized because we do not own an Xbox? Makes no sense. This doesn't make me want to buy an Xbox, it makes me not want to buy the game. The 2nd part is this DLC nonsense is that is separates the gaming community into the haves and have nots. As seen with MW2, BO, MW3, BO2, Ghosts, and now AW, it splits the community and quickly kills the game. The falloff on Ghosts was so bad that the game was a ghost town after the first DLC was released, but that also had to do with the fact that Ghosts was a horrible game. And now that you can purchase guns, ie laser guns, this game has become a Pay to Win game. The laser guns are ridiculous overpowered and ruin what little balance the game had.

    Conclusion -
    Avoid this game at all costs. It's 6 moths after release, and major flaws/issues still have not been addressed, and this point, probably never will. It's definitely not worth the $59.99 price tag, and even at 50% off, that would still be a stretch. Save your money.    … Expand
  68. arbitrator
    Mar 24, 2020
    3
    I can honestly say that this game is not terrible, it clearly doesn't deserve a 10, but it also very obviously doesn't deserve all the 0's and 1's it is getting. So far this is a very basic list of pro's and cons I have found

    Pro's _____ - Movement from jetpack is fantastic and feels pretty natural. -Lack of op weapons and overall fairly balanced -graphics have improved regardless    I can honestly say that this game is not terrible, it clearly doesn't deserve a 10, but it also very obviously doesn't deserve all the 0's and 1's it is getting. So far this is a very basic list of pro's and cons I have found

    Pro's
    _____
    - Movement from jetpack is fantastic and feels pretty natural.
    -Lack of op weapons and overall fairly balanced
    -graphics have improved regardless of what all these people seem to think (water still looks awful)
    -if you can find hardcore matches it is reminiscent of CS in it's tactical gameplay and team communication
    -A lot less op perks and the perks you do get while advancing the game do not take over - Modern warfare 2 anyone? :)

    Cons
    _____
    -Some very annoying bugs, such as the huge lag spikes for the first ~30 seconds of the game
    -No delay on jetpack so you can basically bunny hop 15-20 feet in the air constantly (more of a problem in regular games as hardcore you can easily shoot them down)
    -Lack of guns in general, I'm sorry no matter how many reskins you release of a gun with slight variations, it isn't a different gun. Having 1 more bracket in fire speed with 1 less in accuracy just means its a modded gun, no a new one.
    -Still no dedicated servers, and this is the biggest one for me. No matter what people say, they have been plagued by this problem for years and they always mention they will add them but they don't, just like Ghost.

    My final thoughts are really that this is in improvement in the franchise and if they continue supporting it and adding polish it will be one of the better ones, I would recommend picking this up if you like a more tactical game then the previous installments and are willing to play hardcore.

    P.S. As a side note, since I'm sure people will think this is a fanboy thing since I didn't instantly give it a 0, I have played every cod up to black ops, then stopped for for the next few installments after looking into them. decided to give this one a try and while it wasn't all I was hoping for, it is definitely worth a looking into.

    Edit: came back to fix this up. It was good until hackers went rampant and they did nothing about it. Quickly went from a 7/10 to a 3/10.    … Expand
  69. Zero187
    Nov 10, 2014
    3
    How many reviews start with "it's better than Ghosts, but.."

    This game sucks. Ghosts sucked. Stay far away unless you have absolutely NOTHING better to play or you somehow enjoyed Ghosts.
  70. danneu89
    Dec 2, 2014
    3
    3/10 is for the campaign, which is fun. Not a great story or anything, just some fun, call-of-duty-esque fun.
    0/10 is for the multiplayer. Doesn't work. Please add dedicated servers like you promised. Too laggy to play as of now. If you thought battlefield 4 had netcode problems, holy ####. Prepare to hit a guy 5-8 times to be shot before he even turns around, then watch the killcam show    3/10 is for the campaign, which is fun. Not a great story or anything, just some fun, call-of-duty-esque fun.
    0/10 is for the multiplayer. Doesn't work. Please add dedicated servers like you promised. Too laggy to play as of now. If you thought battlefield 4 had netcode problems, holy ####. Prepare to hit a guy 5-8 times to be shot before he even turns around, then watch the killcam show that none of your shots even fired.

    Every once in a while you enter into a server where everything is running smooth, and it is a truly great game. In these moments, I feel like this could be the best COD multiplayer experience ever. I feel nostalgia for quake and unreal tournament. Then the next game I'm back to these terrible P2P matchmaking shenanigans. Please fix this games MP and I will update it to the 8 or 9 out 10 that this game deserves.    … Expand
  71. Polys
    Nov 23, 2014
    3
    this game had a lot of potential,but it's been a month now with all minor updates and no information about dedicated servers,that is what is killing the game...goodbye sledghammer,hello treyarch again...black ops 2 will climb back at the charts after people get tired of the lagfest and hackfest that's taking place now in advanced warfare's "SERVERS" people host hacked lobbies,almost everythis game had a lot of potential,but it's been a month now with all minor updates and no information about dedicated servers,that is what is killing the game...goodbye sledghammer,hello treyarch again...black ops 2 will climb back at the charts after people get tired of the lagfest and hackfest that's taking place now in advanced warfare's "SERVERS" people host hacked lobbies,almost every leaderboard 10 top players is cheaters,if they'd been honest with us and told us that the game will NOT have dedicated servers maybe i wouldn't be here writing this opinion comment right now but if you are reading this SHG people,you and infinity ward lost many many players...

    it's 2014 for god's sake...and we have to rely on connections instead of STABLE AND RELIABLE DEDICATED SERVERS ?

    WHY ? because they cost ? ok...i'll tell you what's gonna cost more...the ammount of time you'll spend to develop DLC's and NOONE going to buy them because even the MAIN GAME is broken...so why would i pay to "have more" when i'm not able to enjoy the current material you had with the launch...

    ghosts died,advanced warfare is dying only 1 month since release

    it's all about treyarch now...let's hope for the best    … Expand
  72. Davidesol
    Dec 17, 2014
    3
    This franchise is getting worst with every new game, when i purchase ghosts i said myself, that will the last one, i liked it, i had so many problems with my system configuration (2 graphic card, triple monitor setup...), and also is wasnt good enough to pay the amount it costs.

    I am disappointed again, this time game works better, but it doesnt worth the money spent on it, short    This franchise is getting worst with every new game, when i purchase ghosts i said myself, that will the last one, i liked it, i had so many problems with my system configuration (2 graphic card, triple monitor setup...), and also is wasnt good enough to pay the amount it costs.

    I am disappointed again, this time game works better, but it doesnt worth the money spent on it, short singleplayer campaings, and barely played a few hours on multiplayer vs hundreds played on modern warfare series :(    … Expand
  73. technofan21
    Nov 10, 2014
    3
    To begin, I wanted to like this game. I haven't played the multiplayer, so I'll leave that out of the review. Personally, I feel that one can judge the quality of any FPS game by playing the story/campaign mode. Technically, this is just one big demo for the game itself, and the developers have to please customer as much as possible.

    In some ways, I felt that Ghosts was the correct    To begin, I wanted to like this game. I haven't played the multiplayer, so I'll leave that out of the review. Personally, I feel that one can judge the quality of any FPS game by playing the story/campaign mode. Technically, this is just one big demo for the game itself, and the developers have to please customer as much as possible.

    In some ways, I felt that Ghosts was the correct approach for the Call of Duty campaign. There were some really cool parts, some neat guns, and some down right awesome levels like the space mission.

    When I noticed that the game was going to focus around special abilities being used in combat, I again felt like the Call of Duty franchise was taking another large leap forward. However, I was so, so so so so wrong.

    You have all these super OP abilities, and half the time in the campaign you can't even use them. I feel so chained by the will of the programmer in the game that it honestly stopped the intense action packed fun. There were again, like Ghosts, some supremely bada** moments in the game, but they only lasted for a very short period of time. It seemed that each time I was having fun, Sledgehammer would rip that fun right from my hands.

    As far as graphics concerned, they were pretty allright. However, the graphics on characters and faces are absolutely astounding. This, in and of itself, is probably the only thing I like about the game.

    However, especially the way that this game progressed through the "story" mode ( the writing was absolutely tired and predictable) , all in all it felt like I was watching a very droll action film with bad direction. It was a good looking film, but it still just f***ing sucked.    … Expand
  74. Rumface
    Nov 25, 2014
    3
    The PC version of this game is by far the absolute worst and feels like a step back on previous call of duty games and the battlefield series which have leveraged the PC platform to make great games better on a more open and powerful system. What would have been a good multi-player shooter is stifled with technical and design issues making it almost unplayable.

    I found the single player    The PC version of this game is by far the absolute worst and feels like a step back on previous call of duty games and the battlefield series which have leveraged the PC platform to make great games better on a more open and powerful system. What would have been a good multi-player shooter is stifled with technical and design issues making it almost unplayable.

    I found the single player uninteresting but your mileage may vary over the 5 hour campaign for it's high retail price.

    If you are returning to COD after a few of their previous titles failed to impress on the PC - don't bother picking this one up - it is a complete mess and cheaters, lag issues on the peer to peer system and awful performance issues and crashes are all that you can bet on greeting you.    … Expand
  75. YouDieToday
    Dec 30, 2014
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Because the concept of the exo skeletons seemed so awesome, I decided to pre-order this game on PC.
    When starting the single-player, I noticed the great graphics. Sadly, the game had to start like it usually does. You lose a compagnion. Reaally sucks.

    The single player itself is, just like most of the call of duty's, awesome, but the storyline is always boring. It's so predictable! Some random missions, and then some development in the storyline. Even a kid can see where the storyline goes to. No surprises, really. Except for the alliance with Comrack, which I enjoyed. The extra features were nice. The graphics of the storyline movies are outstanding, the best I have yet seen in a game. If this could turn in actual gameplay, wow. The gameplay graphics are still the same.

    The storyline is, again, way too short.. I would rather have them publish a game every two years that's long with an outstanding storyline and great multiplayer, than this rubbish. It's all about the money, it seems.

    As I explored the multiplayer, I became very disappointed. The exo skeletons aren't an extra. They suck. I can imagine it's amazing for some, because of new speed, new dimensions, a new way of playing etc., but for me it's plain rubbish. I like to play a game stealthy without camping, but here there is no stealth at all. And if you're trying to be, someone will always spot u while hovering over you.

    I play with a controller on my pc and I feel I have a disadvantage. People with gaming mouses can set it up to reduce the recoil of the weapon and thus stabilize it while shooting. When I shoot, the weapon mostly shoots everywhere, while others (I watch the killcams) don't seem to have any difficulty with firing their weapon.

    I don't feel like buying anymore of their games!! If only I could sell this very bad game!    … Expand
  76. Legicey
    Jan 19, 2022
    3
    Gameplay: Generic, fast paced, COD. The main gimmick is the "advanced movement" which isn't that bad in the campaign, but in the Multi-Player the entire **** screen is an angle you can get shot from. I also hate the map design and the guns are really boring. No dedicated servers ether to I can only really play with bots as of today, the game is dead. 2/10 Bad

    Story: Campaign story isn't    Gameplay: Generic, fast paced, COD. The main gimmick is the "advanced movement" which isn't that bad in the campaign, but in the Multi-Player the entire **** screen is an angle you can get shot from. I also hate the map design and the guns are really boring. No dedicated servers ether to I can only really play with bots as of today, the game is dead. 2/10 Bad

    Story: Campaign story isn't that bad. It's kind of just generic Hollywood and the main antagonist is so generic it's funny. The ending sequel baits as well. Also, F to pay respects. 4.5/10 Below average

    Exo Zombies: It's ass. 1/10 Truly Horrible

    Graphics: Pretty good for the time and they still kind of hold up today. Interior lighting looks better then exterior lighting and textures kinda look like **** compared to modern textures we have to day but overall, not bad. 5/10 average (If compared to graphics today).

    Sound: Guns sound fine, if a bit compressed and the music is also just meh.

    A game like this rests on the back of it's gameplay, which is bad, so overall 3/10. Not the worst COD game out there (WW2 is worse) but still far from good.    … Expand
  77. Allions
    Feb 22, 2015
    2
    Boght the key for this at 24€. My last COD was MW3 on xbox and i did not like it a lot.
    Anyway... this is a bad copy of titanfall with the COD multuplayer. The single player is BORING, feels the same thing from others CODs. The multiplayer is LAGGY (no dedicated server) always with the NAT problem (damn i play every online game OK and with this i need to do al the mess with my router?)    Boght the key for this at 24€. My last COD was MW3 on xbox and i did not like it a lot.
    Anyway... this is a bad copy of titanfall with the COD multuplayer. The single player is BORING, feels the same thing from others CODs. The multiplayer is LAGGY (no dedicated server) always with the NAT problem (damn i play every online game OK and with this i need to do al the mess with my router?) and not very funny. Many DLC as always with maps and guns... and the price is too high. Anyway i not reccomend them because the game is really bad. In multiplayer everyone only jump to avoid being hit. WTF!?    … Expand
  78. timaloy
    Nov 6, 2014
    2
    mw4 rehash we have here same terrible online lag same graphics issues same old **** different year no support no anything poor effort from sledgehammer
  79. beladrim
    Nov 18, 2014
    2
    Reskined corridor shooter with a plot that will only appeal does with very low IQ's.

    Same old "PvP" where everyone is its own little rambo rather than going for actualy team play!

    The novolty?

    Kevin Spacey

    Exo suit that.... Doesn't do anything?

    Jet packs....

    Why do people still buy this crap?
  80. faceless-1
    Nov 24, 2014
    2
    This game got broken multiplayer. It fails to find games and you have to edit config to even work and even then its lag fest. The single player is super short and average at best.
  81. gokule
    Nov 6, 2014
    2
    While this is an 'Okay' game, its not worth the 60€ they are asking.
    The amount of bugs in the multiplayer system is insane, and the P2P connection (no dedicated servers) is one big **** up on their side. It's laggy and the game crashes, the server are so unstable right now it's just to laugh at.
    Gameplay is just about the same as all other CoD games out there, with a few improvements..
  82. Luhgnut
    Nov 6, 2014
    2
    How much skill does a player need to rage in COD:Advanced Warfare? Not much apparently. This game is like Unreal Tournament 2000 with all cheats enabled for everyone.

    I've never experienced a game, where the developers main focus is to allow players to use "cheats" that would get you banned in other games. Those being: I can see through walls with my gun sight (wall hack). I can    How much skill does a player need to rage in COD:Advanced Warfare? Not much apparently. This game is like Unreal Tournament 2000 with all cheats enabled for everyone.

    I've never experienced a game, where the developers main focus is to allow players to use "cheats" that would get you banned in other games. Those being:

    I can see through walls with my gun sight (wall hack). I can shoot through walls (another wall hack). Another gun site lights up all players in front of you in bright red (Skinning Hack). Another gun will track onto lit up targets (Aimbot). Now if that isn't enough to make you an uber player... let's bring in the toys..... shall we? We now have "Homing Grenades" yes, the hand grenades can be tossed in the general direction of the enemy and they will home in onto them, no defense. You have hand grenades that light up every player camping in a building. So I pull out my no skill, shoot through a wall gun, and casually kill everyone. - Homing drones. Yes, boys and girls, you can take this paper airplane looking thing... toss it into the air without a care in the world, and it will fly over the battlefield and when it sees someone, homes in on them. Now, we have drones, that allow everyone to see everyone on the battlefield. A player tosses one of these no brainers into the air, and other players on the team, can join in on the fun, and rain hell down on everybody. And since it sees everyone on the field. You can kill everyone pretty easy. Lightning strikes obliterate anyone in it's path. Cover or no cover. If it flys over, you're dead.

    Oh the nifty new dodge feature/gimmick. It allows you to glitch your movement. It's not fluid, and it looks stupid, because the animation is stuck while you do it. And it lights you up on the minimap instantly when you bolt a few feet in a direction. Then you're dead because since the maps are so small, everyone can shoot everyone as long as you can see them. Since everyone can pretty much see everyone, what's the point? You may as well avoid all that, remove the buildings. Put everyone on a flat surface and give them all uzi's.

    Sound is horrid. Simply horrid. My surround sound headphones that are normally filled battle sounds and positional sound mapping, is confusing, because sounds just go in and out at random. Very quiet battles. Nobody yelling, nobody saying anything.

    Oh a shotgun can be silenced. Shoots like a full automatic rifle, and sounds like a small handgun. The positional 3D should be disabled, because where the footsteps seem to be coming from one direction, they are actually someplace else, because the sound processing is so weak, it's confusing. Turn off your surround sound gear because it makes things worse.

    Graphics.... ON a high end graphics card, it is pretty bad. No shading, I don't see any benefit for having shadows on, because you really can't see them, but they do appear to have a negative impact on performance,.... shut them off, because they aren't needed and will make things worse.

    Maps are tiny. Tiny tiny. If you play Battlefield, Imagine taking a server of 24 people. Cram them all between A and B objectives on Metro. You get the idea. That's what ALL the maps are like. A smaller, crammed full small Rush Metro map. That's their "Conquest" size map. I get claustrophobic just loading into the map. If you want a quality, fast shooter, that requires some skill... Go play Titanfall. It's much more of everything COD:AW wants to be and more.

    I wasn't a COD hateboy before buying this, but I am now. This is a joke. If you like it...good for you, but you must be seriously, easily amused or on a console. This is not PC gaming material. It's nearly an insult.    … Expand
  83. BobbyM747
    Apr 14, 2015
    2
    Oh great, another call of duty title. Decided to try this when it was free during a weekend on steam. It is just like the rest, but with a few more features. It was fun at first, but then FPS was all over the place, and it became repetitive very quickly. I don't know what it is about MW3 and BO2 that makes them addictive for me, but this isn't great at all. Completely overhyped, to theOh great, another call of duty title. Decided to try this when it was free during a weekend on steam. It is just like the rest, but with a few more features. It was fun at first, but then FPS was all over the place, and it became repetitive very quickly. I don't know what it is about MW3 and BO2 that makes them addictive for me, but this isn't great at all. Completely overhyped, to the maximum capacity. Weapons are not impressive at all, the maps are decent, create a character is actually pretty cool. That's about it. The only reason I give this a score of 2 is because of the new movement and new character creation. Other than those two, its the same as the rest.… Expand
  84. badbluewolf
    Feb 4, 2015
    2
    It might be fine on consoles. I don't know. Judging it on the PC version. It's completely and utterly unplayable for about 3 hours until you figure out how to optimise the damn thing. 'Oh hey' says the game, 'you want to make your game look better on a good machine?'. 'Yes' I reply. 'Well tough' says the game. So glad I only got the free multiplayer trial and since this series nowIt might be fine on consoles. I don't know. Judging it on the PC version. It's completely and utterly unplayable for about 3 hours until you figure out how to optimise the damn thing. 'Oh hey' says the game, 'you want to make your game look better on a good machine?'. 'Yes' I reply. 'Well tough' says the game. So glad I only got the free multiplayer trial and since this series now emphasises that multiplayer is now as important if not more important than single player, I'll take that as a sign to judge it entirely on what I have seen. So concluding, it's a horrible, buggy, badly optimised mess. Give it a mess, 2 out of 10.… Expand
  85. flobob33
    Nov 17, 2014
    2
    While I was playing I wondered if it was a real AAA game!!
    I really don't know how and why this game was been released on pc: it's bad optimized whereas graphisms are pretty ugly, any dedicated servers, unstable connection, ...
    If the game was free or at least not expensive, it would be understandable, but it's sooo expensive and it's done by one of the biggest video games company. That    While I was playing I wondered if it was a real AAA game!!
    I really don't know how and why this game was been released on pc: it's bad optimized whereas graphisms are pretty ugly, any dedicated servers, unstable connection, ...
    If the game was free or at least not expensive, it would be understandable, but it's sooo expensive and it's done by one of the biggest video games company.
    That game is just ashamed...    … Expand
  86. jlcv91
    Nov 12, 2014
    2
    LAAAAAAAAG....LAAAAAAAAG....LAAAAAAAAGGGGS thas what this multiplayer as new(or just worst then all the others),for the rest expect the same cod as always!
  87. KurtCobain67
    Nov 9, 2014
    2
    Let me start off by saying that I already knew that this was going to be bad. Like, 4/10 bad. It turns out that this game managed to disappoint me further than that! Same garbage, no-skill game play with slightly different graphics that I can't even say have improved, same glitchy, buggy, laggy game play including things such as bullets following you around corners on your screen, but onLet me start off by saying that I already knew that this was going to be bad. Like, 4/10 bad. It turns out that this game managed to disappoint me further than that! Same garbage, no-skill game play with slightly different graphics that I can't even say have improved, same glitchy, buggy, laggy game play including things such as bullets following you around corners on your screen, but on the player's screen who killed you, you weren't around the corner yet. Even with multiplayer being the primary focus of this game, like every other recent Call of Duty title, (because we all know no ***** are given about CoD campaign) the multiplayer game play is highly disappointing. People will never learn that the CoD series has become a re-release of the previous games with mediocre additions and a futuristic twist that gets more exaggerated each time. Don't be one of those people. Don't let these idiots steal your money from you and go spend your $60 on something useful/meaningful such as a gift for your girlfriend/wife/mother.… Expand
  88. Struyk
    Nov 4, 2014
    2
    * LvL 50 Multiplayer review *

    Random? Gun Damage - Two enemies at the same distance, one needs 15 bullets before he dies and the other one dies in 5 bullets, really no clue how this is possible but it happens ALL THE TIME. It really feels like bullets randomly deal between 10%-200% damage Netcode? - 90% of my deaths feel like I died instantly with no chance to retaliate, my last    * LvL 50 Multiplayer review *

    Random? Gun Damage - Two enemies at the same distance, one needs 15 bullets before he dies and the other one dies in 5 bullets, really no clue how this is possible but it happens ALL THE TIME. It really feels like bullets randomly deal between 10%-200% damage

    Netcode? - 90% of my deaths feel like I died instantly with no chance to retaliate, my last death I got shot from about 50 meters by a silenced SMG and I died instantly. When I try this, I need to hit a full mag.... Ragequited pretty hard.

    Guns - There are only 4 *meta* guns worth using, the rest is just terrible. All shotguns are really bad ( need 2x more range to work ), sometimes need 5 shots at 5 meters distance while enemy needs 3 bullets with his ak12. Snipers need 2-3 hits to kill someone, and it's already hard enough to hit people when they are jumping around like monkeys.

    Knifing - I removed the knife keybinding.... I tried to knife people 500+ times and maybe got 3 knife kills out of it. Enemy has to be either in kissing range, to your left or BEHIND you.....

    Same Call of Duty, but now with more mobility and lasers for $60...    … Expand
  89. flyingpinguinz
    Nov 11, 2014
    2
    Honestly, this game is fun. It's like call of duty, with a little more mobility. But it is a call of duty game. Don't expect counter strike physics or anything. HOWEVER, this game is also upsetting .The graphics are bad. Just, awful. I'm running SLI GTX 780's. On ultra settings. At 1440p resolution. And the game still looks like I'm playing it on the Xbox One. Stupid. OH. And NO DEDICATEDHonestly, this game is fun. It's like call of duty, with a little more mobility. But it is a call of duty game. Don't expect counter strike physics or anything. HOWEVER, this game is also upsetting .The graphics are bad. Just, awful. I'm running SLI GTX 780's. On ultra settings. At 1440p resolution. And the game still looks like I'm playing it on the Xbox One. Stupid. OH. And NO DEDICATED SERVERS.... This makes the game laggy as all heck about 50% of the time. If these are fixed, the game will be okay. But I still wasted 60 bucks.… Expand
  90. Jonny247
    Dec 7, 2014
    2
    So disappointing, this is without doubt the worst call of duty game made to date and mine is going straight back to the shop. Many will have said this is just halo with a C.O.D badge on it but it's true. In cod there have always been options to play different styles and with different equipment, like claymores and bouncing Betty's, that let you hold off an area and watch your back, or youSo disappointing, this is without doubt the worst call of duty game made to date and mine is going straight back to the shop. Many will have said this is just halo with a C.O.D badge on it but it's true. In cod there have always been options to play different styles and with different equipment, like claymores and bouncing Betty's, that let you hold off an area and watch your back, or you can run and gun. With advanced warfare, no options, just run and gun makes for a very narrow playing experience. Multiplayer menus are slow on line, armory graphics look cheap and the selection of guns is rubbish. After owning it for 2 weeks I'm bored to tears with it and just can't find a gun that's "fun" to play with. Do yourself a favour and keep your money til next year, hopefully treyarch won't drop the ball like sledgehammer had.… Expand
  91. fade3
    Dec 15, 2014
    2
    Having played Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare since its release in 2007, none of the successors have improved over the past years. On the contrary. With the filthy console age we live in, the PC version of Advanced Warfare is a horrible port. 90fps cap, big lag spikes online, ripoff crysis / titanfall exo suit, bad mouse sensitivity adjustment, boring achievement and unlockables. All ofHaving played Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare since its release in 2007, none of the successors have improved over the past years. On the contrary. With the filthy console age we live in, the PC version of Advanced Warfare is a horrible port. 90fps cap, big lag spikes online, ripoff crysis / titanfall exo suit, bad mouse sensitivity adjustment, boring achievement and unlockables. All of this puts this game at a score of 2 / 10. How on earth they came to the conclusion of continuing the non-dedicated server hosting system is beyond my comprehension. This series stopped at COD4:MW, wich is still going strong with its dedicated server and hardcore fanbase.… Expand
  92. Floof
    Jan 12, 2015
    2
    A new call of duty. Its like taking the last years presents and wrapping them again. No one wants that. It has also been ported to PC quite poorly. I don't even see the so called "next-gen" textures. They should focus on bug-fixing and porting the game better. For me, the game doesn't lag or anything like that. Its just that they still use the player-as-host method which is pretty oldA new call of duty. Its like taking the last years presents and wrapping them again. No one wants that. It has also been ported to PC quite poorly. I don't even see the so called "next-gen" textures. They should focus on bug-fixing and porting the game better. For me, the game doesn't lag or anything like that. Its just that they still use the player-as-host method which is pretty old already. If people have a bad connection its just cancer to play. I played this for 20+ hours then i uninstalled it. Its like MW3 all over again. 70€ down the drain. 0/5 would buy again. (Still giving a 2 because of the way things are going, i hope that someday i might want to play Call Of Duty again. Like in the old days.)… Expand
  93. WOODERSON1105
    Feb 14, 2015
    2
    Do not buy the pc version of this game. There is no dedicated servers like they said there were there are alot of players with cheats and hacks they dont kick . You cant enjoy the multiplayer gameplay because of cheats and spawns. some games you will get spawn killed dozens of times even with a gaming pc the maps start out very laggy this is by far the worst cod yet ghost was pretty badDo not buy the pc version of this game. There is no dedicated servers like they said there were there are alot of players with cheats and hacks they dont kick . You cant enjoy the multiplayer gameplay because of cheats and spawns. some games you will get spawn killed dozens of times even with a gaming pc the maps start out very laggy this is by far the worst cod yet ghost was pretty bad but nothing compared to this black ops 2 was last decent game cod has. Every year when they put out game they have a stament saying there will be dedicated servers but there never is. It might just be the pc version i dont know but worst game on pc every. DO NOT BUY… Expand
  94. Stormcrow666
    Nov 4, 2014
    1
    At first I thought that there was something wrong with the game settings since I have been hearing how great the graphics were. I had everything cranked, even with supersampling and I could still see muddy textures and terrible aliasing. I couldn't help but wonder if this is a AAA title or a FTP MP game.
    Graphics aside, this is a corridor shooter that isn't worth the money. I feel cheated    At first I thought that there was something wrong with the game settings since I have been hearing how great the graphics were. I had everything cranked, even with supersampling and I could still see muddy textures and terrible aliasing. I couldn't help but wonder if this is a AAA title or a FTP MP game.
    Graphics aside, this is a corridor shooter that isn't worth the money. I feel cheated :(
    Last time I buy a CoD game.....ever.    … Expand
  95. irishbloke
    Jan 17, 2015
    1
    I wanted to like this game, but the multi player game is unplayable for me. I have above the recommended specs and 2 months later i cant play the game due to huge fps drops in the multiplayer game. Avoid this if you have AMD hardware.
  96. Mudpooch
    Nov 10, 2014
    1
    Extremely rotten cod fish is how I would describe my experience regarding this game.........................................................That's all
  97. ChosenOne
    Sep 21, 2015
    1
    NO GAMES FOUND
    NO GAMES FOUND
    NO GAMES FOUND
    NO GAMES FOUND
    Single campaign is not so bad, by the way.
    NO GAMES FOUND
    NO GAMES FOUND
    NO GAMES FOUND
    But multiplayer doesn't work
    NO GAMES FOUND
    NO GAMES FOUND
    NO GAMES FOUND
    NO GAMES FOUND
  98. partyintheback
    Nov 3, 2014
    1
    Short campaign. We beat it in 4 hours. Mediocre multiplayer. Seems like the creator of these games has stopped caring or something. Please put more effort into the next game. This isn't worth $60. Give to charity instead.
  99. Phallex
    Dec 28, 2014
    1
    After the disaster that was Black Ops, I've stayed away from COD games. After reading a few reviews on here that critics were just fanboy bashing and that they had genuinely tried something different in the FPS field, I decided to get a (discounted) copy.

    What a disappointment. This is just the same tired COD, the same tired gameplay, the same graphics. With a double-jump feature.    After the disaster that was Black Ops, I've stayed away from COD games. After reading a few reviews on here that critics were just fanboy bashing and that they had genuinely tried something different in the FPS field, I decided to get a (discounted) copy.

    What a disappointment. This is just the same tired COD, the same tired gameplay, the same graphics. With a double-jump feature. That's it. That's classed as innovation now.    … Expand
  100. Karga
    Nov 30, 2014
    1
    I read some stuff about Activision taking down some videos on youtube. Well that's a big negative imo. I wouldn't waste a single dollar to a company like that, no matter how big-budget or fancy their games are. If you don't respect your customers, you don't deserve a penny. That being said, I heard the game is full of cheats, bugs etc. People having lots of connection issues. NowadaysI read some stuff about Activision taking down some videos on youtube. Well that's a big negative imo. I wouldn't waste a single dollar to a company like that, no matter how big-budget or fancy their games are. If you don't respect your customers, you don't deserve a penny. That being said, I heard the game is full of cheats, bugs etc. People having lots of connection issues. Nowadays people have so many options, limitless shooters in the market. So I would gladly try-out some low-budget games instead of any COD game.… Expand
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 »