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. Atticas14
    Nov 4, 2014
    0
    Not supporting dedicated servers is an insult to the superiority that is the PC master race. Maybe console gamers can handle the variable latency issues, but I won't.
  2. yogibbear
    Nov 4, 2014
    0
    No dedicated servers. Same terrible netcode. Avoid at all costs. Until they reinstate dedicated server support for this series the online competitive multiplayer is officially dead due to horrible lag. 0/10.
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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..
  6. 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
  7. 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
  8. tpapas1
    Nov 24, 2014
    0
    what a piece of crap. 10 yrs ago it would be an achievement. still this is where it belongs. not in 2014. if you want exosuites and and robots and advanced warfare do as I did: buy Titanfall
  9. clarky
    Nov 4, 2014
    0
    There is something about it that is badly aged. On a modern rig, it just looks a bit flat. Anyway, BAM, unskippable cut scenes starts this review off at 5/10 for commiting acts of development crime. Forcing me to watch this garbage with my precious time instead of playing anything. Then when I actually get to the game, it plays it for me. I was lining up a face shot and my team blew himThere is something about it that is badly aged. On a modern rig, it just looks a bit flat. Anyway, BAM, unskippable cut scenes starts this review off at 5/10 for commiting acts of development crime. Forcing me to watch this garbage with my precious time instead of playing anything. Then when I actually get to the game, it plays it for me. I was lining up a face shot and my team blew him away, so I selected a new target, and he was blown away. So I figured there is no point in actually playing the game. It is like a cutscene where I control the camera. Then I seen people prancing around on jet packs, and I thought man this game sucks. It will just be a spray fest. It is one true stinker of a game and even if it was free, the bandwidth would still be too much to pay.… Expand
  10. 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
  11. Rhoen
    Nov 4, 2014
    0
    Once again a AAA studio has people in their PR department making Review accounts that spam the same review across the board cross platform and have never reviewed any other game, always giving it a 10. I can rarely trust games on their merits now a days because the reviews are so often falsified.
  12. kaf34
    Nov 3, 2014
    1
    It's better than ghosts but then again, that wasn't hard to begin with. Same old engine (it is still the ancient id tech engine) still the shallow SP campaign, still the narrow corridor. dumb AI and "you are leaving the mission area if you take 5 steps in direction game doesn't want you to go in.

    COD and Activision do not deserve the money they will make on this. 1/10, still has ways    It's better than ghosts but then again, that wasn't hard to begin with. Same old engine (it is still the ancient id tech engine) still the shallow SP campaign, still the narrow corridor. dumb AI and "you are leaving the mission area if you take 5 steps in direction game doesn't want you to go in.

    COD and Activision do not deserve the money they will make on this.
    1/10, still has ways to go, would not buy.    … Expand
  13. 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.
  14. 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
  15. quakke
    Nov 3, 2014
    0
    Where do i start this? Same game, different year and differet paintjob but nothing new. Yes, not even this time around anything new, it's just the same old same old. This game is still even running on the infamous id tech III/quake 3 engine which is from 1999! Is it possible to get AAA games that are 16 years old? Well, apparently it is :( These ppl just will continue to milk on cluelessWhere do i start this? Same game, different year and differet paintjob but nothing new. Yes, not even this time around anything new, it's just the same old same old. This game is still even running on the infamous id tech III/quake 3 engine which is from 1999! Is it possible to get AAA games that are 16 years old? Well, apparently it is :( These ppl just will continue to milk on clueless ppl and obviously the clueless ppl will continue on throwing cash at these greedy publishers.

    Here is something you can do though. Instead of going out and buying the new call of duty, how about you do differently this year? You don't go out and buy the same **** so that games will start to get better, because they don't try to mimic this cashcow anymore and therefore don't get ruined and we get rid from this stagnation that is bugging games thesedays. Yes, call of duty is the biggest responsible for us having nowadays stagnation in our gaming community. We don't get varied games because they all try to mimic call of duty. Now i know we don't like that, so therefore you could just be and not go out and get the new call of duty this year. I promise you, it will pay off, because then we will get some totally new game, nothing to do with call of duty, that is gonna blow us out from the water. Totally innovative, totally crazy fun.

    Don't buy this.    … Expand
  16. 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
  17. Whitescreenop
    Nov 3, 2014
    0
    Graphic evolution XD maybe for a super nintendo game but this game looks and feels like a 70 dollar piece of **** ... PLS save your money and dont buy this game its so poor in gameplay and the singleplayer is useless and the story never starts going somewhere its the same story every military shooter has no point of playing this story. Also the multiplayer is less fun even with high kdrGraphic evolution XD maybe for a super nintendo game but this game looks and feels like a 70 dollar piece of **** ... PLS save your money and dont buy this game its so poor in gameplay and the singleplayer is useless and the story never starts going somewhere its the same story every military shooter has no point of playing this story. Also the multiplayer is less fun even with high kdr you can kill 5 people the you get kill with an easy 1 shot from behind and well its just like **** this game i quit there are many better shooter games to play… Expand
  18. 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.....
  19. ASanePerson
    Nov 3, 2014
    0
    First of all, I want to remind everyone that this game still runs on that 10 year old engine, seriously. OK and now onto the game itself, while I haven't ecountered any lag issues for now I'll like to remind everyone that this game DOESN'T HAVE DEDICATED SERVERS OR MOD TOOLS. With the new jumping mechanics, there will be potential for great mods but yep, they're not here. Also, all of thisFirst of all, I want to remind everyone that this game still runs on that 10 year old engine, seriously. OK and now onto the game itself, while I haven't ecountered any lag issues for now I'll like to remind everyone that this game DOESN'T HAVE DEDICATED SERVERS OR MOD TOOLS. With the new jumping mechanics, there will be potential for great mods but yep, they're not here. Also, all of this new Exo-suit and whatever **** really is just a rip-off of Crysis and Titanfall.… Expand
  20. velvetmeds
    Nov 3, 2014
    0
    More aim-assist casual no-skill, no brains, garbage... A game that plays itself for you like every COD before it. Nothing has changed. It's the same COD as always, and not worth a cent.
  21. Dykiss
    Nov 3, 2014
    0
    bad ping, lags, FPS drops. Overall a bad running game, I think!
    But consoles people play quietly, and PC as usual in hand, the game as you want to receive.
  22. W3XC
    Nov 3, 2014
    8
    I find it so funny how the haters are desperately trying to bump this game down, and looking at all the arguments makes me smile :)

    Please Metacritic, do something about these spammers.

    The game it'self looks much better than any COD as of yet. The gameplay is the good old COD, but different enough to make it a "newer" experience.
  23. xSpektre
    Nov 3, 2014
    8
    Never been more ashamed to be a PC gamer. Call of Duty finally gives us what we want with an extremely robust amount of settings, dedicated servers, a new engine, etc etc. People aren't even giving it a chance, and are instead voting 0 based on what they hear or what they think they know. Half the 0 reviews think that the game runs on the same engine.. do your research, it's a new engineNever been more ashamed to be a PC gamer. Call of Duty finally gives us what we want with an extremely robust amount of settings, dedicated servers, a new engine, etc etc. People aren't even giving it a chance, and are instead voting 0 based on what they hear or what they think they know. Half the 0 reviews think that the game runs on the same engine.. do your research, it's a new engine by a new studio. These reviews are the epitome of what's wrong with Metacritic, where everyone who voted 0 on games either has a 0 or a 10 for all their games. Pathetic, broken system. As someone who's actually played the game, I can tell you that the game is fresh, fun, and definitely the Call of Duty experience that's translated well over onto PC, especially with a movement system that adds enough variety that will have PC players feeling at home. It's not GOTY material, and the story isn't as great as I was hoping, but I'd be lying if I said this wasn't a good game, and I'm going to give it the review it deserves. Not a 10 or a 0 to pad the whole user score to what I personally think it deserves to be at. Grow up people.… Expand
  24. Shroomtastic
    Nov 3, 2014
    9
    Count me as surprised, every COD launch since Black Ops as been a disaster. Poorly optimized pieces of garbage pretty much. I've been playing AW for a few hours now and suffered from 0 frame lag. The game runs fluidly and feels well balanced. The hitboxes seem to be spot on and honestly I was a bit concerned the new jumping mechanism would be OP but its not it honestly just adds a newCount me as surprised, every COD launch since Black Ops as been a disaster. Poorly optimized pieces of garbage pretty much. I've been playing AW for a few hours now and suffered from 0 frame lag. The game runs fluidly and feels well balanced. The hitboxes seem to be spot on and honestly I was a bit concerned the new jumping mechanism would be OP but its not it honestly just adds a new dimension to the gameplay. The character customization is pretty awesome and overall I can see myself putting hundreds of hours into the multiplayer.… Expand
  25. J4MESOX4D
    Nov 3, 2014
    10
    This is probably the best Call of Duty since MW2. I know it's early to make such a sweeping statement but the game just oozes brilliance on a number of levels. It is streets ahead of Ghosts in every aspect and really puts Infinity Ward to absolute shame. Even Treyarch need to raise their game for next year. Sledgehammer have essentially taken the best aspects of past games and fused themThis is probably the best Call of Duty since MW2. I know it's early to make such a sweeping statement but the game just oozes brilliance on a number of levels. It is streets ahead of Ghosts in every aspect and really puts Infinity Ward to absolute shame. Even Treyarch need to raise their game for next year. Sledgehammer have essentially taken the best aspects of past games and fused them into their very own interpretation along with delivering their own brand of unique ideas.

    The gameplay is fast, the guns are incredible fun, the matches flow superbly and every second is really enjoyable. The maps are simply stunning to look at and their designs & layouts make way for some frantic action.

    The optimisation for PC which has been heavily questioned after Ghosts and Sledgehammer's silence in the media; is actually riddled with depth and all the key elements to compliment your rig. I really did not expect much but they really have hit the nail on the head from a technical standpoint.

    I've not enjoyed COD since the Black Ops days but this is a game that really rejuvenates my desire for the franchise. After the pitiful Ghosts last year; this game simply had to deliver and it truly has. SHG took a risk for their first outing and it really paid off in what could be a genre-defining title.    … Expand
  26. 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
  27. 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!
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. dannieeddie2008
    Nov 6, 2014
    0
    So another CoD game... Where do I begin. It is just another CoD game in the end with a few little added details, jumping higher, gliding, guns, the sounding !!! What else is new. Campaign, Good! Multiplayer, Bad (as always). Just another CoD game at the end of the day.
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

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

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
78

Generally favorable reviews - based on 18 Critic Reviews

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