Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

 PC
User Score
3.1

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 5706 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1,201 out of 5706
  2. Mixed: 740 out of 5706
  3. Negative: 3,765 out of 5706
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. liho1eye
    Nov 13, 2011
    4
    None of the big issues from BO and MW2 were fixed. The MP is still based on listen servers. Yes, you can play on dedicated servers, but you can't unlock anything there, so you HAVE TO endure craptacular hit reg until you hit max level and unlock everything you need. Respawn system is still hard at work to make you claw your own eyes out. The rest of seems like a copy-paste of MW2, whichNone of the big issues from BO and MW2 were fixed. The MP is still based on listen servers. Yes, you can play on dedicated servers, but you can't unlock anything there, so you HAVE TO endure craptacular hit reg until you hit max level and unlock everything you need. Respawn system is still hard at work to make you claw your own eyes out. The rest of seems like a copy-paste of MW2, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but hardly worth the price of a full game.… Expand
  2. Sarra
    Nov 22, 2011
    3
    I didn't even buy BF 3 as planned, for some obvious reasons, but lets just say Origin to keep me from going on a rant. But BF3 being bad aside, this, this isn't even a PC game, it's a console port that was supposed to have dedicated servers. And it does, but it for un ranked. I have no idea what the hell they are thinking, but it certainly isn't to make good games. Gameplay wise, it's theI didn't even buy BF 3 as planned, for some obvious reasons, but lets just say Origin to keep me from going on a rant. But BF3 being bad aside, this, this isn't even a PC game, it's a console port that was supposed to have dedicated servers. And it does, but it for un ranked. I have no idea what the hell they are thinking, but it certainly isn't to make good games. Gameplay wise, it's the same as MW2, which was liek COD4 but with a bunch of stupid gimmicks. Save your money, rent for your PS3/360/Wii, but don't get for PC, please.… Expand
  3. Lost
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    okay what MW2 is. Mw2 is a re-skinned game with new maps, the game play is clunky the game is just overall a joke. I am telling you this now don't even bother to buy it maybe when its $20 but before that stay away my friends.
  4. TrollFace_McGee
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Worst game EVER. Of all time.
    The campaign of this game is terrible. Its linear, has bad writing, generic gameplay, and the graphics are showing its age. The whole game is you going trough narrow paths and shooting bad guys. One good thing about it is that the campaign lasts only 3 hours. They try to distract you from how bad it is with big explosions every two seconds but the engine is so    Worst game EVER. Of all time.
    The campaign of this game is terrible. Its linear, has bad writing, generic gameplay, and the graphics are showing its age. The whole game is you going trough narrow paths and shooting bad guys. One good thing about it is that the campaign lasts only 3 hours. They try to distract you from how bad it is with big explosions every two seconds but the engine is so old that they look just lame. Scene where a child is killed tries to generate controversy like the airport mission in MW2 but it fails miserably. The multiplayer is the same thing you already played several times before. Almost nothing is changed from the previous games. The new maps are bland and not worth it. The new modes are nothing special. If you are buying the game for its multiplayer, buy MW instead, its cheaper and better balanced. Also the game suffers from numerous bugs on the PC version. My advice is to stick with the first MW or just play a better FPS like RO2 or BF3.    … Expand
  5. Etna
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    I returned my Xbox360 copy to see how much better it would play on PC, and too be honest, its not even any better, in fact

    IT PLAYS WORSE, I've also returned this copy, if a game isnt fun in the first hour, then it's not worth continuing.
  6. CODRippedUsoff
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    This game gets a 2 out of 10. Same Game, same graphics, same sounds, nothing is new but a few lame play styles, No dedicated servers, it lags all the time or loses game connectivity. Its the last time I will be buying a COD game! IF you agree connect to the site I posted and Help the movement to open their eyes!

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/COD-Ripped-US-OFF/314273318589267
  7. rand0m9
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    I play CoD for the multiplayer and it was a huge let down. I basically loaded up the game expecting something more than a re-skin and new maps. If you are not just determined to own this I would save yourself some money and play a different game. Or go back to mw2 and get the map packs. From what I can tell the graphics are only slightly better and since its back to iwnet the lag getsI play CoD for the multiplayer and it was a huge let down. I basically loaded up the game expecting something more than a re-skin and new maps. If you are not just determined to own this I would save yourself some money and play a different game. Or go back to mw2 and get the map packs. From what I can tell the graphics are only slightly better and since its back to iwnet the lag gets ridiculous at times. I regret buying it.… Expand
  8. Tokamak
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Credit to the developers, artists, animators etc. for their hard work (I am missing out QA here on purpose). Its obvious that a decision was made to keep with whatever their current tech was and effectively release an expansion pack that follows on the story from the single player MW2. Nothing wrong with doing that but charging the same price for a full game when you haven't addedCredit to the developers, artists, animators etc. for their hard work (I am missing out QA here on purpose). Its obvious that a decision was made to keep with whatever their current tech was and effectively release an expansion pack that follows on the story from the single player MW2. Nothing wrong with doing that but charging the same price for a full game when you haven't added anything new is doing a disservice to the player. The action sets pieces are visually quite nice and follow the Hollywood action movie style just as effectively as the previous titles do in the series. However restricting the player to a liner path through the game is getting a bit of an old game mechanic now so something different would have been nice (Just look at what EIDOS did with Deus Ex). You could probably forgive them for the liner game-play if there were at least some cool new thing you could do in each refresh of the title (like Ubisoft giving you more abilities in Assassins Creed) but the only innovation seems to be a bit of weightless gunfigthing (which is quite cool though not very long) and a few new guns. The auto-save feature however still manages to occasionally kick in at the worst moments making replaying a section annoying when the first thing you need to do is try and survive long enough to get into cover. The biggest problem however is the game stopping bug about a third of the way through the PC campaign. How that one slipped by EA's QA I will never know. Sure it will probably be quickly patched and there is a work around to get you past it if you do some googling put the fact that such an obvious bug that can be found by just playing the game in the normal fashion made it through to the final release suggests that hitting deadlines was more important than releasing a working game.

    If this game we released as a maxi DLC or a boxed expansion for around £25 then its would probably rate at 8 but as it stands a 2 it is.    … Expand
  9. sollaan
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Single player I feel was the only game that was done relatively well, although the storyline was a tad predictable. However i feel a majority of people bought this game for the multiplayer, and players like us, whom spend thousands of dollars on our custom rigs, and then hundreds of dollars in games don't expect to play something as mediocre as this was.
    The Call of Duty francise is a    Single player I feel was the only game that was done relatively well, although the storyline was a tad predictable. However i feel a majority of people bought this game for the multiplayer, and players like us, whom spend thousands of dollars on our custom rigs, and then hundreds of dollars in games don't expect to play something as mediocre as this was.
    The Call of Duty francise is a multi-million dollar industry, YET it refuses to spend this money on improving the game. instead this game has opted to using an engine that is over 2 years old, weapon sounds from previous games & not to mention that dreaded P2P network. what infinity ward has failed to understand is that if we wanted to play via P2P we would of bought an xbox or a PS3 not spend thousands of dollars on our rigs. Robert Bowling has some serious rethinking to do; to attempt at riving this dying franchise.    … Expand
  10. Neurotic
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    No dedicated servers.
    Awfull graphics and sound.
    Gameplay is identical to previous releases.
    They reuse all the same graphics, sound , models even the plot is a recycled piece of trash.

    NOTHING NEW HERE- 60$ THANK YOU VERY MUCH
  11. zebra204
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Absolutely, hands down one of the worst games I've ever played. Who would of thought something with so much action can be so incredible boring. I couldn't bring myself to play more because it was such uninspired, rehashed garbage. Nothing good to say about this trash.
  12. Dinjooh
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Never once have I felt so betrayed by a game developer. That they honestly want to treat their customers like this. They didn't even try to lube it up. It was just rough from the beginning. No foreplay, just plain shiat, from start to end. Wauw.
  13. Aetos
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Another MW game, and this time, they didn't bother to hide the fact that they were reusing textures and building from the fourth installment, or that they hardly changed anything about the overall gameplay. In fact, they seemed to have taken a step back from their newer game, Black Ops, opting for a tired out MW2 system. Brainless fun, a junk food of a game. Save your 60$.
  14. ChoO-T
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Glen Schofield plz,dont beg your score.
    Seriously, just take your money and get the hell out, do not cry on a well-deserved backlash.

    For video game sake .
  15. Schmebos
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    It looks decent, sure but if you consider that this is nothing short of food from the week before, what would you expect. But what do we get? The usual campaign with loads of bang, boom, explosion here and there and poof. Finish. That's about all. Everything else has been there at some point and you get a feeling that they didn't even try to improve game-play. And - as a little special forIt looks decent, sure but if you consider that this is nothing short of food from the week before, what would you expect. But what do we get? The usual campaign with loads of bang, boom, explosion here and there and poof. Finish. That's about all. Everything else has been there at some point and you get a feeling that they didn't even try to improve game-play. And - as a little special for us PC oldies - we can feel the cold chill and neglect by not getting all the features that console players get (and need to pay for in parts - haha). And why? Because people are cheating? No certainly not. Just because they were to lazy to invest any thought into this problem. Good job. Well done.… Expand
  16. surfingcinv
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    I have played all the COD games, my favorites being Call of Duty, Call of Duty MW1, and black ops.I have also played everything from unreal tournament, quake, RTCW Enemy territory and everything in between. I have to say that Call of Duty MW 3 is the biggest hyped piece of crap shooter I think ive ever played. It feels like everything is too fast, everyone is on crack, the guns dont evenI have played all the COD games, my favorites being Call of Duty, Call of Duty MW1, and black ops.I have also played everything from unreal tournament, quake, RTCW Enemy territory and everything in between. I have to say that Call of Duty MW 3 is the biggest hyped piece of crap shooter I think ive ever played. It feels like everything is too fast, everyone is on crack, the guns dont even sound right. The mechanics feel all wrong! I felt like a was playing street fighterr, in a John Woo movie, dropped in little cramped , terrible maps. I WANTED this to be a good game, I really did. I spent 60 dollars... and now I cant return it - what a joke. Dont think I will trust this line of games again , ever. Dont waste your time or money. And to top it alllllllll offf, no dolphin dive? fail, epic fail!… Expand
  17. roguedesigner
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have actually played this game, let's get that out of the way first as the internet PR mill swings into action to try to tell the world that people giving MW3 a low score haven't played it.

    First, I have to agree that in many ways it does feel like a very expensive expansion pack for MW2. Sadly in the areas that it does differ from the older game, it almost invariably takes a step or two backward. Take the graphical quality, for example. Much of the game is now accompanied by a blurring effect, as if somebody has clumsily tried to implement depth of field without really understanding what it should do. It's not really distracting but it serves no purpose. We still have the same faintly ridiculous world in which Russian regulars try to gun you down with Belgian made weapons and the SAS is composed entirely of Scots and Londoners, but the way in which you interact with it has changed. Any chance of finding an immersive experience is ruined by far too frequent in-game cut scenes in which you, the player, are denied any control over your character. Activision don't even deem you worthy of being able to look around as the wafer thin story unfolds. We had these cut scenes in previous iterations of COD, but it has gone too far this time. One point in the game has your character duck under a low pipe, or rather it would were you allowed any control; instead, we are treated to yet another mini cut scene as the character's hand grasps the pipe and you swing ever so daintily beneath it. Ludicrous, and in a SP campaign that lasts a scant 5 hours you need all the trigger time you can get. No doubt MW4 will be a 4 hour CGI movie which doesn't require the player to bother himself the tedious task of actually doing anything.

    Later in the game, the cutscenes introduce reveals that tie in to MW2's back story in an attempt to up the wow factor, but frankly they do little more than elicit a roll of the eyes. We're also treated to another slaughter of the innocents section, but unlike the "No Russian" in MW2, this one is entirely superfluous to the game and seems to exist only to generate free publicity on the back of a tabloid controversy. It's a cynical and pointless move that serves only to rob you of another few minutes of gameplay.

    The game's final boss fight (yes, it's sunk to those depths), which is reached via a twist that a two year old could have seen coming, is marred on PC by repeatedly having instructions to use certain keypress combinations flashing up on screen. If the control system is so poor and counter-intuitive that Activision need to do that, then this game isn't ready for prime time.

    Overall, a mildly diverting if woefully short single player experience that fails to flow freely. I have to admit to not having played MP yet, and in my eyes this is the only possible route this game has for salvation. The worst COD instalment by a mile.    … Expand
  18. tovrocks
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    I've played the 360 and pc version of the game. Its nearly the same, with the difference that you have different controls and better graphics. But the rest is the same:
    It has a short, boring campaign, with some scripted scenes which we already know from the previous games. There is nothing new in this game. No vehicles, no interesting new weapons, no innovative features, it has nearly    I've played the 360 and pc version of the game. Its nearly the same, with the difference that you have different controls and better graphics. But the rest is the same:
    It has a short, boring campaign, with some scripted scenes which we already know from the previous games. There is nothing new in this game. No vehicles, no interesting new weapons, no innovative features, it has nearly the same graphic as the previous games. For such a high price you guess that you are making a good deal. Instead its a update of modern warfare 3 which includes a different title, a new menu and some changes like 2 or 3 new perks, thats all. Most of the maps are recycled from the previous games. It could have been a nice update for 10 bucks but instead it became an overpriced "game". When i played i felt no difference to modern warfare 2 which i played one week ago.    … Expand
  19. lihasmassamasa
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    Ah my used to be favorite series returns. MW2 was the first sign that things are going the wrong way, black ops gave a little hope to us pc players (dedi etc) , but MW3 takes it way way back as it wont even work with my connection(student housing connection through university). All the other games work just fine I would not recommend anyone to buy this game as you may not get a working product !
  20. Duoshot
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    They should fire the team who decided it was a good idea to have every second mission in MW3 be a f***ing turret mission. The campaign was storytelling at its worse. It was just as bad if not worse than BF3's campaign, which was put in to show off the Frostbite 2 engine. Even Duke Nukem: Forever had a better story.

    The Multiplayer definitely has the worst maps out of all the Call of    They should fire the team who decided it was a good idea to have every second mission in MW3 be a f***ing turret mission. The campaign was storytelling at its worse. It was just as bad if not worse than BF3's campaign, which was put in to show off the Frostbite 2 engine. Even Duke Nukem: Forever had a better story.

    The Multiplayer definitely has the worst maps out of all the Call of Duties. They are merely the same map but all set in different weather/time zones. The guns are also just as bad. they are all a re-skin of the same gun. All the Assault Rifles have the same fire rate, damage, recoil, etc. Half of them even have the same iron sights for f***s sake, and all of them have the exact sound file for firing. There is no point in unlocking guns, because the first gun is exactly the same as the last unlockable gun. Oh, and what the f*** did they do the ACR. Holy f***.

    Survival mode is fun and a lot better than BO's zombie mode. This is the only redeeming factor for MW3.

    This game looks and sounds like it should've been released in 2007. Or as a DLC. I'm not even comparing it to BF3, because BF3 outshines everything by far, but you need the newest rig to run it. Every single game that's been released in the past 2 years looks and sounds better than this crap.

    If you still plan on buying this game, don't. Either steal it or pirate it, this game is not worth your money.

    0/10. I want my 2 hours of playing this game back.    … Expand
  21. TheBlackMachine
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    I cannot believe this game, I knew in my deepest of hearts not to buy it, but I said "Screw it, lemme jump on the bandwagon and see if they actually didn't screw it up like BO"

    How wrong I was. For a start this game feels like MW 2.5, nigh on everything is recycled from MW2, from the sounds, textures, and just about anything else they could pick out from the previous title. The SP was    I cannot believe this game, I knew in my deepest of hearts not to buy it, but I said "Screw it, lemme jump on the bandwagon and see if they actually didn't screw it up like BO"

    How wrong I was.

    For a start this game feels like MW 2.5, nigh on everything is recycled from MW2, from the sounds, textures, and just about anything else they could pick out from the previous title. The SP was so forced and ugly that I couldn't stand to play it for more than 30 minuets. I'd rather go play BF3's singleplayer and we all know how bad that is.

    Multiplayer is the same crap as always, nothing much as changed except some killstreaks (not many new ones, a fair number of them are recycled) and a few crappy guns thrown in. I will admit the weapons feel more balanced and the map design is better over BO but it still doesn't justify charging £40 for a game that is basically a DLC pack.

    Many games are pushed back or delayed by a great deal because of this downhill failing cashcow, it is totally unfair and getting annoying. Hopefully they'll realise that they've dished out this franchise so much it resembles a spent whore. And hopefully people will noticed and give another franchises a chance of actually releasing Christmas season games without posting a loss. I can't believe how much CoD has fallen since 4, 1, 2 and 4 were fantastic pieces of FPS awesomeness. Now it's bland rubbish.    … Expand
  22. snowbear
    Nov 12, 2011
    3
    The game deserves its low rating on the pc at least. Campain: meh at the most, its short, linear, no improvements in graphical/audio fidelity, and to top it off the story isnt even good. so id give it a 3/10 for that

    Graphics: there is free to play indie games out there that look better. And compared to other games in the same market its poor. 5/10 Functionality: Again nothing new.    The game deserves its low rating on the pc at least. Campain: meh at the most, its short, linear, no improvements in graphical/audio fidelity, and to top it off the story isnt even good. so id give it a 3/10 for that

    Graphics: there is free to play indie games out there that look better. And compared to other games in the same market its poor. 5/10

    Functionality: Again nothing new. MW had more options and that came out in 2007. Very very poor 2/10

    Multiplayer: The most annoying aspect of this game. could have been good. IW were making all the right noises on this one. Then at the last minute ruined all their hard work ten fold. How can you tell your community that you listened to all the feedback from mw2, and then completely disreguard all of what was said. 0/10 as in its current state it might as well not exist. Life span: as there is no multiplayer worth playing and the campain is 4 hours long max. 3/10 Value for money: as i have it on the pc 0/10 as it has no trade in value... This is why the game doesnt deserve to have a good review score    … Expand
  23. PJokerz
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    So disappointed in the game. Infinity ward screwed up bad. Black ops was a great game so i had hopes that Infinity ward would have learned a thing from treyarch but they didnt. I want my money back.
  24. ZomgNoWai
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    Why waste $60 on a game, that is nearly identical multiplayer-wise to its past title mw2?

    Same GUI, some guns have the same recycled animations.

    The only difference, i see, is some better looking water.
  25. thebrunfail
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    If you like Call Of Duty, You will like Modern Warfare 3. If you don't like Call Of Duty, You will HATE Modern Warfare 3. I don't like Call Of Duty.
  26. TotalPirate
    Nov 12, 2011
    1
    The game is as ugly as Robert Koticks soul. It's actually insulting, what little effort was put in. I say to Robert, stop abusing the stupidity of the public and let this cash cow die.
  27. pierrepp
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    I can smell developer's attitude from this, horrible FOV, lots of old assets, sounds etc. and the same old stupid P2P-style ranked games. I mean Black Ops wasn't bad, this really feels like a downgrade from it.
  28. killzon32
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    activision has no respect for the pc gaming community so I will not respect them with a good score.
    Game itself is just mw2.5 full of hackers day one they are not stopping them they don't care about us they just want money so once you buy it.. well... GG
  29. Diggo11
    Nov 12, 2011
    1
    Disappointing. Modern Warfare 1.5 rehashed, campaign waaay too short, multiplayer a tactical clone, essentially no graphical improvements, usual technical difficulties (this time hackers more than crashes). A score of one still feels to generous... Interesting how Steam price has already dropped 30% in Australia; if you're considering buying it then go save yourself a few bucks and opt forDisappointing. Modern Warfare 1.5 rehashed, campaign waaay too short, multiplayer a tactical clone, essentially no graphical improvements, usual technical difficulties (this time hackers more than crashes). A score of one still feels to generous... Interesting how Steam price has already dropped 30% in Australia; if you're considering buying it then go save yourself a few bucks and opt for MW1/BO instead.… Expand
  30. Farcus
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    This is literal garbage for the amount of money they're charging. The SP is good but not $60 worth good. MP nothing new, sure its fun but I feel like its MW2.5 and not actually 3
  31. malexe
    Nov 13, 2011
    0
    Same as MW2, a good copy/paste work made by Activision to milk the game. I bet they will release a few DLC for 20bux too.

    This is a braindead game with nothing new. A lot of stupid kids will play it.
  32. Hailong
    Nov 13, 2011
    0
    This is not a game is DCL.

    JUST A GOOD single player campaign, and a multiplayer game, copying from the last Call of Dutys,

    $60 for this DCL? Crazy... only copy/paste game!
  33. hardcore_javier
    Nov 13, 2011
    2
    muy simple...me siento estafado por lo que pague. un juego reciclado, y ya explotado hasta la muerte. Lo que mas me molesta es el audio el sonido de las armas, parecen airsoft que armas,realmente lamentable todo esto. Espero que para el proximo call reapunten. si si tengo el bf3 pero no entra a competir con el call, le doy esta nota por que sinceramente se las merecen infinite awards ymuy simple...me siento estafado por lo que pague. un juego reciclado, y ya explotado hasta la muerte. Lo que mas me molesta es el audio el sonido de las armas, parecen airsoft que armas,realmente lamentable todo esto. Espero que para el proximo call reapunten. si si tengo el bf3 pero no entra a competir con el call, le doy esta nota por que sinceramente se las merecen infinite awards y activion basta de burlarse de los gamers. prefiero mi MW1 que esta basura que compre… Expand
  34. Kotleto
    Nov 13, 2011
    0
    This game has disappointed me in everything: the best single player delusional from all that I did see, the atmosphere in the game, well conceived weapons balance in multiplayer - all terrible. Developers do not care about the players, they would only pull money from people. The standard time for me was the Cull of-Duty 4, then went just up the game: one part to another, with little innovation
  35. Kamshak
    Nov 13, 2011
    0
    Same as mw2, copy and paste of the game, i feel this game is a scam. I paid the price of a full featured game to get this recycled mw2 with a few things renamed and new weapons. The campaign is cheap and feels very put together. I was expecting so much from this game and it's much worse than i hoped for. The very limited dedicated server support feels like they just put it in to shut theSame as mw2, copy and paste of the game, i feel this game is a scam. I paid the price of a full featured game to get this recycled mw2 with a few things renamed and new weapons. The campaign is cheap and feels very put together. I was expecting so much from this game and it's much worse than i hoped for. The very limited dedicated server support feels like they just put it in to shut the pc gamers up.

    The multiplayer is pretty much the same as mw2(still many little annoyances) but the hit detection is much worse now. When i shoot next to a guy i usually end up hitting him, most likely they did this to make up for the lagg that happens because they didn't put in proper dedicated server support. The maps are also very bad and most are just reskins of previous maps with a few little changes but major paths are still the same    … Expand
  36. EightballKiller
    Nov 14, 2011
    0
    I case of issuing an expansion pack as a new game. Out dated graphics and very poor multi-player. This game a a complete joke. Horrible leveling, lack of choices for game play and hard-core modes. I will never per order a game again after this turd has graced my computer. Better to wait and see the player reviews. Activision and Infinty Ward pulled a fast one on us. I was expecting andI case of issuing an expansion pack as a new game. Out dated graphics and very poor multi-player. This game a a complete joke. Horrible leveling, lack of choices for game play and hard-core modes. I will never per order a game again after this turd has graced my computer. Better to wait and see the player reviews. Activision and Infinty Ward pulled a fast one on us. I was expecting and hoping for so much more, only to be disappointed. DO NOT BUY THIS GAME!!!… Expand
  37. Global_Gamers
    Nov 14, 2011
    3
    Well, after playing the game, I am deeply disappointed. While the game does have dedicated servers, they are hard to set up and the maximum slot count is only 18. I like to play large scale games with 32+ slot sizes. If you want a good selling game, then you should learn what you did for Call of Duty 4 and use that strategy instead. Call of Duty 4 was very well thought out game. It usedWell, after playing the game, I am deeply disappointed. While the game does have dedicated servers, they are hard to set up and the maximum slot count is only 18. I like to play large scale games with 32+ slot sizes. If you want a good selling game, then you should learn what you did for Call of Duty 4 and use that strategy instead. Call of Duty 4 was very well thought out game. It used local stats, public dedicated servers that allowed up to 64 slots, it has mod tools, used Punkbuster anti-cheat. This new game has none of that. That is where IW/Sledgehammer games failed.

    I like Battlefield 3 a lot more because of the large scale game play and Punkbuster anti-cheat. I don't know whose idea it was to keep peer-2-peer, but, they messed up by doing that. Go back to Call of Duty 4 and do it exactly that way and then you will have a great game again.

    Cheating in Modern Warfare 3 is ridiculous. Every single peer-2-peer game I went into already has some type of cheating going in. Valve Anti-Cheat (VAC) does not do anything to catch them. With Punkbuster, server admins or other players can record demos of cheaters in first person mode and submit them to 3rd party anti-cheat sites like PBBans.com and get those players banned from streaming servers. In my honest opinion, this game is way off from the tradition of Call of Duty 4 and needs to be fixed immediately. Get rid of peer-to-peer and go with full dedicated servers for everything.

    With that said, I hereby give Modern Warfare 3 a rating of a 3.    … Expand
  38. Wingman835
    Nov 14, 2011
    1
    Before you read this, I'm not a troll, BF3 fanboy, whatever you want to call it. While this game delivers the action packed singleplayer, and the nice survival mode, it lacks innovation. Spec Ops is the same, multiplayer is the same. Before we talk about the PC version, first lets talk about the game on all platforms. The maps are all very similar and are pretty obvious they are based offBefore you read this, I'm not a troll, BF3 fanboy, whatever you want to call it. While this game delivers the action packed singleplayer, and the nice survival mode, it lacks innovation. Spec Ops is the same, multiplayer is the same. Before we talk about the PC version, first lets talk about the game on all platforms. The maps are all very similar and are pretty obvious they are based off of old maps. The guns all feel like guns we've used before, recycled sounds, etc. The only new thing to multiplayer really is the strike packages, which is just honestly a gimmick. This game has nothing new to offer, it is not worth your $60 when you can go play MW2 or Call of Duty 4. Now as for the PC version, it lacks many things that console get. We don't get doubleXP from Mountain Dew, we don't get Call of Duty Elite, and once again are we stuck to rank up with console peer-to-peer, as dedicated servers is unranked only. This shows that Activison does not care for the PC Community.… Expand
  39. lunarx3dfx
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    MW3 is exactly as I expected. More of the same. Call of Duty has officially become the Madden of first person shooters. At least there was a visual upgrade with MW1 to MW2, but the visuals are actually lower quality in this title. The only reason I bought this was to finish the story, and because the multiplayer has always been entertaining. However, the multiplayer isn't even thatMW3 is exactly as I expected. More of the same. Call of Duty has officially become the Madden of first person shooters. At least there was a visual upgrade with MW1 to MW2, but the visuals are actually lower quality in this title. The only reason I bought this was to finish the story, and because the multiplayer has always been entertaining. However, the multiplayer isn't even that enjoyable. Thank you Activision for turning this series into garbage and thank you to the remnants of Infinity Ward, Sledgehammer Games, Raven, and the other company that helped make this game whose name I can't think of. You all couldn't make a decent game even with your combined efforts.… Expand
  40. vexuk
    Nov 14, 2011
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I feel so cheated out of my money promised a game and all i feel is i just got ripped off not able to claim my money back and now searching for a new game on my pc as everything i seem to buy is a waste of money and no fun at all.

    MW3. wow whats to say about this game that has probably not been said already i find P2P a waste of time and effort no matter what happens on my screen kill cam tells a its own story just nothing like what happend on my screen.

    Dedicated servers take away the strange roll backs but still feels laggy and strange its the Game Engine and not the servers clearly i have games over 10 years old that feel less laggy and better alround game style and more responsive than this.

    Leveling up in an FPS feels like a waste of time you can level up and up but still have the same issues as above and not have a very good or on the other hand a really good kill to death ratio but its not really showing the true picture all it shows is how good/bad connection you have how boring and sad you are to sit playing 12 hours a day sitting in a corner or if your just running around like a headless chicken its really easy to be unskilled and a really bad player but still do well.

    Maps are poor small to many places to camp people spawn behind you constantly no reason for that its just frustrating.

    I am done with FPS game now no more waiting for Diablo 3 to pass the time on till i go guild wars 2 anything else i have seen is just not worth my money.    … Expand
  41. idesofendeth
    Nov 14, 2011
    0
    I remember storming the beaches of Normandy five years ago in one of CoD 2â
  42. PuppetMa5teR
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    When it comes to graphics MW3 actually took a step back from MW2. It look like MW1.5 graphics. The fluidity of the game is great just like it was in MW2. I am happy that they reduced the damage on grenade launchers and other explosives. I really wish they would have taken out Akimbo machine pistols all together. Akimbos in this game are way too over powered. So far the maps are all smallWhen it comes to graphics MW3 actually took a step back from MW2. It look like MW1.5 graphics. The fluidity of the game is great just like it was in MW2. I am happy that they reduced the damage on grenade launchers and other explosives. I really wish they would have taken out Akimbo machine pistols all together. Akimbos in this game are way too over powered. So far the maps are all small and close quartered, there are no open maps. Other than that I think the MP gameplay is pretty balanced. The Single player campaign was too short and really didn't have that AWE factor to it. I like the co-op Spec ops though! This game was initially a PC game then later became part of the console. Now they make the game for console and port it to PC. I just don't feel the love or support for the PC community anymore. They didn't give us ranked dedicated servers like RBowling stated "it will be the same as CoD4" but that was a tale. Alot of people purchased Mountain Dew so they could get XP, but that wont work for the PC version. I had Cod4, MW2 and Black Ops and prestige in all of them, but I dont get the prestige tokens like the console players get (why not just give the PC player a couple of tokens for free? It's not that hard to give us some gratitude for contributing to your cash cow.… Expand
  43. Colo
    Nov 14, 2011
    4
    MW3's release was one I was both hoping and dreading. Having played every game in the series, I've been an unwilling witness to IW's slow decline. Every new release I've played since CoD:MW has been progressively worse. Not terrible, but slowly degrading, like an emphysema patient in ICU.

    And that last sentence gets to the crux of my review; the first Modern Warfare was the best. I    MW3's release was one I was both hoping and dreading. Having played every game in the series, I've been an unwilling witness to IW's slow decline. Every new release I've played since CoD:MW has been progressively worse. Not terrible, but slowly degrading, like an emphysema patient in ICU.

    And that last sentence gets to the crux of my review; the first Modern Warfare was the best. I believe there are 3 reasons for this:

    1. GAMEPLAY. MW's gameplay was superior because it had PACING. Many game developers seem to forget what this is in favour of flashy graphics and stupid awards. In MW you could set up a sniping position, pick off a few targets and then probably get taken down by a savvy player who had spotted your position and used the appropriate cover to get there. CoD:BO, MW2 and MW3 killed this concept by creating confined levels with dedicated fire lanes, meaning that snipers are regularly killed before they even get off the first shot. Combine this with sniper rifles and the gameplay abomination that is "quickscoping", and all you see is players RUNNING around with sniper rifles. Hell, once they learn the Assault Rifles are more accurate, you don't even SEE sniper rifles in use. Running with a sniper rifle doesn't seem realistic or even fun to me.

    2. SPAWNING. The spawning in CoD:BO multiplayer was bad, but the spawning in MW3 is execrable. Two steps forward and the player that's spawned behind you shoots you in the back. And that's if only one enemy player spawned near you. The original MW OCCASIONALLY had a similar issue when battle lines were fluid, but generally it cunningly used a combination of well designed maps and spawning areas to create battle lines. Yes, BATTLE LINES. Not running like a loon from one end of the map to the other, simply because you knew someone would be spawning on your head in the next 5 seconds. I have fond memories of dodging between heaps of trash in "Bog" as I tried to flank enemy snipers and MG's, and similar happy moments while running or sniping in "Bloc" and "Vacant".

    In a nutshell; it may be fun for 30 seconds to run headlong around a map shooting at everything because you have to. There are whole worlds of enjoyment to be had in defending positions, flanking snipers, setting up battle lines, creating enfilades, etc. Run and gun is only enjoyable for a short period of time, and isn't how EVERYONE wants to play.

    Also, women are correct: when it comes to multiplayer maps, size really DOES matter.
    3. You've all heard it at some point - DEDICATED SERVERS. I applaud IWnet for trying something new, but until the world standardizes everyone's internet connection and CPU speed, you're flogging a dead horse...

    Now I have mostly negative comments for the multiplayer, but I have to say that I quite liked the Single-Player experience. IW haven't lost their edge there, and it's fun, fast and engages the audience. It could have been a bit longer, but I can see why IW kept the story to the length they did. I thought I'd at least end on a positive... :)

    Colo    … Expand
  44. Tardkart
    Nov 15, 2011
    3
    MW2.5 v.HorribleMaps.exe



    Seriously, the game would have been great if the maps weren't so terrible. Maybe people suggested to IW and Sledgehammer that they wanted constant guns blaring, continuous sprinting and non stop shot-in-the-back action but it all jumbles into a terrible experience.
  45. MTMAX
    Nov 15, 2011
    1
    I feel burned buying this game for PC..

    It feels like Infinity Ward did their very best to jusssst make slightly enough changes and sprinkle enough new content here and there to call it #3. In reality it feels like a giant number..well you can guess. All the things you hated about the PC version in MW2 before are back. Player hosting. The idea of player hosting on PC is just the    I feel burned buying this game for PC..

    It feels like Infinity Ward did their very best to jusssst make slightly enough changes and sprinkle enough new content here and there to call it #3. In reality it feels like a giant number..well you can guess.

    All the things you hated about the PC version in MW2 before are back.

    Player hosting.

    The idea of player hosting on PC is just the stupidest thing ever. It's nearly insulting. I won't even get started about the COD modding community that the devs have turned their back on. Why and when was it ever a good idea of having cell phone bars in place of such intelligent things referred to as 'ping' or 'latency'? If I can't understand a numerical value then maybe I should have bought the version which gives me simpler input through a controller.

    Apparently the PC masses aren't smart enough to pick servers to play on either, so your going to be staring at those little spinning stars from MW2 again. (Silver instead of gold now!) NO LEAN?

    Also to just put the feather in the hat on this giant turd is the fact that lean is still not in the PC game again. It is a game changer to not have it and one of the sole reasons I was so hooked originally on MW. Obviously, corners were cut which is sad for a game boasting about how its sold so many units. I can say Infinity Ward games just won't be on my 'buy list' anymore. A half-hearted attempt at a NEW title that is barely different enough to call it so for $60. The cold reality is this could and should have been a DLC around half the cost.

    Congrats on the money grab. It'll be the last one from me.    … Expand
  46. Eponim
    Nov 15, 2011
    0
    Maybe a good DLC, but certainly a poor game. Poor graphic, NO RANKED DEDICATED SERVER, no evolution for the gameplay, short solo, corridors maps only. Upscaling in video settings (shame)
    I precommanded a game for the first time and that's the last for sure.
  47. uah
    Nov 15, 2011
    0
    Nothing more than a map pack for multiplayer with the same graphics than its predecessors. The campaign is playable but still nothing new in this saga. Lack of work by the developers plus the cost of the game I think it is an insult, still the hardcore gamers are the ones who want the game stay like it is now.
  48. davgav
    Nov 15, 2011
    0
    I'm very disappointed. This is the same game, again. No better graphics, no better gameplay, no better multiplayer from MW2. No multiplayer across multiplatforms.
  49. SgtHowlingFury
    Nov 15, 2011
    1
    Outdated graphics, latency issues, performance issues, lack of pc support, anticheat is lacking. weapon unbalance issues. too many small maps and lack of creativity.
  50. layziekow
    Nov 16, 2011
    1
    The game feels exactly like Modern Warfare 2 and that I spent $60 for a DLC that contained 16 new maps and a few extra perks. The only reason why I gave it a one is because they did not ruin the game, but how could they; itâ
  51. Ochadd
    Nov 17, 2011
    3
    Multiplayer feels very arcade like. Strategy takes a back seat to being twitch based. Too often are groups shot in the back because someone spawned an an area cleared 10 seconds before. If you like to test your twitch and always be surrounded than it would be excellent for you. If you have played COD4 Modern Warefare, Black Ops, or Modern Warefare 2 then MP will feel much like a closeMultiplayer feels very arcade like. Strategy takes a back seat to being twitch based. Too often are groups shot in the back because someone spawned an an area cleared 10 seconds before. If you like to test your twitch and always be surrounded than it would be excellent for you. If you have played COD4 Modern Warefare, Black Ops, or Modern Warefare 2 then MP will feel much like a close quarters map pack.

    The single player campaign plays like a movie with the novelty of interaction. You do play it but it's predictable, infinitely spawning enemies, and set triggers.    … Expand
  52. gardengnomeOO7
    Nov 19, 2011
    0
    Ok, I was fine leaving this game alone for a while, but they pushed it too far now. Is it a horrible pc port with non-adjustable FOV? Yes. Does it have worse graphics that MW1? Yes. Does it have ranked dedicated servers? No. Is it MW1 with a little MW2 and Black Ops mixed ( mainly the bad parts ) in with worse pc support? Yes. If you got your hopes up that they learned that people like toOk, I was fine leaving this game alone for a while, but they pushed it too far now. Is it a horrible pc port with non-adjustable FOV? Yes. Does it have worse graphics that MW1? Yes. Does it have ranked dedicated servers? No. Is it MW1 with a little MW2 and Black Ops mixed ( mainly the bad parts ) in with worse pc support? Yes. If you got your hopes up that they learned that people like to be able to go outside the invisible walls and actually explore don't think they learned that. and to make everything worse which took away the 1,2, or 3 I was going to give it if I had a really good day and was feeling generous was that Sledgehammer Gamesâ… Expand
  53. Kelz
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    I have no idea why i decided to buy CoD MW3, i never really liked any of their other games besides CoD4 and CoD2, but i thought i would give it a try as it looked like it could be fun in the trailers and what not. It wasn't. This game was a waste of 30 quid it's so boring the graphics are quite bad though i don't care too much about that but the audio is just horrible, the guns sound likeI have no idea why i decided to buy CoD MW3, i never really liked any of their other games besides CoD4 and CoD2, but i thought i would give it a try as it looked like it could be fun in the trailers and what not. It wasn't. This game was a waste of 30 quid it's so boring the graphics are quite bad though i don't care too much about that but the audio is just horrible, the guns sound like paintball guns. I would advise anyone not to buy this game as the developers don't deserve your money they've mad no innovation at all from previous games from what i can see, i don't get why this game is so popular there are way better and more deserving games out there.… Expand
  54. bruceybaby
    Nov 23, 2011
    3
    It is quite clear that Infinity Ward has lost its magical touch. MW3 is a huge dissapointment; this was the perfect chance to innovate and truly bring us something fresh, but it appears as though this game simply seeks to ride on the success of its predecessor, MW2. Having said that, it really isn't MW3; a more suitable name for the game would be MW2.5 i.e. what MW2 SHOULD have been. ThisIt is quite clear that Infinity Ward has lost its magical touch. MW3 is a huge dissapointment; this was the perfect chance to innovate and truly bring us something fresh, but it appears as though this game simply seeks to ride on the success of its predecessor, MW2. Having said that, it really isn't MW3; a more suitable name for the game would be MW2.5 i.e. what MW2 SHOULD have been. This isn't completely true though, as MW3 still suffers from a wide array of problems, the most prominent of which is the unadjustable Field of View (a common NECESSITY in FPS games). I find it almost impossible to play this game on PC without it giving me a head ache. I don't want to spend any more time explaining how bad this game is (although I feel obligated to point out the netcode is TERRIBLE and the multiplayer suffers massively as a result), but one thing IS clear: the game is a cash grab.… Expand
  55. Asmodeas
    Mar 31, 2012
    0
    The online is where your supposed to get most of your gaming dollars worth but it's almost unplayable because of hackers, and there is no way to kick or catch them so.........If you like lots of **** HACKERS and a COMPANY that doesn't give a **** about YOU then this is your game. The single player is ok
  56. IdiotTroll
    May 20, 2012
    0
    Omg! They might as well, like, just like, call this like, modern warfare like, 2.5 because like, it's like, the same thing, like, iw is like, so dumb like, they wrote almost the same game like, wow man.
  57. Flastie
    Nov 12, 2011
    3
    I have a multiple points of view on this COD. First is the gameplay and whole "feeling" from game. Its great, the story, the feeling, its like you play a movie. A true cinematic experience in your control. For that i give 8/10. But that is all. What is much worse is graphic. and inovations in this game Horrible resolution of textures, awful 2d background, 2d fences. My god is this a 2011I have a multiple points of view on this COD. First is the gameplay and whole "feeling" from game. Its great, the story, the feeling, its like you play a movie. A true cinematic experience in your control. For that i give 8/10. But that is all. What is much worse is graphic. and inovations in this game Horrible resolution of textures, awful 2d background, 2d fences. My god is this a 2011 game? Indie game developers with much less budget can create graphics better than this. Another problem is MP. Nothing new, just recycled previous COD. I believe if they spend more time on the technical side of this game, i would give it 9/10, but for this "dinosaur" graphic and no inovation im giving 4/10. That graphic is just LOL, 2004 games have much better graphics like this. nobody wants crysis graphics, but they should give us at least graphic from this decade, not from the last 00s.… Expand
  58. Darkvader75
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Terrible graphics and old gameplay lead one to wonder why this was supposed to be worth buying. Battlefield 3 just set the benchmark for 64 player online massive FPS multiplayer. I guess that benchmark was just set to high for COD. It's not surprising as COD has lagged behind in quality and gameplay since 2003. I would say the grafix in Battlefield 2142 from 2008 look better then CODTerrible graphics and old gameplay lead one to wonder why this was supposed to be worth buying. Battlefield 3 just set the benchmark for 64 player online massive FPS multiplayer. I guess that benchmark was just set to high for COD. It's not surprising as COD has lagged behind in quality and gameplay since 2003. I would say the grafix in Battlefield 2142 from 2008 look better then COD MW3. The movement is terrible. The campaign was such a let down next to BF3 and the gameplay is terrible. The broken class system really stands out next to the revamped BF3 class's.… Expand
  59. Geomags
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This game is just awful, best DLC I've ever played but defiantly not worth your £40/$60. For a started the campaign is predictable and boring, as per usual, and does not do anything new what so ever. The multiplayer is the same with some added game modes, this is not innovative, you can get new game modes like these in Call of Duty 4 mods. The engine is the same so theThis game is just awful, best DLC I've ever played but defiantly not worth your £40/$60. For a started the campaign is predictable and boring, as per usual, and does not do anything new what so ever. The multiplayer is the same with some added game modes, this is not innovative, you can get new game modes like these in Call of Duty 4 mods. The engine is the same so the graphics are 2 years old, its just lazy. Last but not least you cannot edit your FOV so your stuck with a FOV of 55 or something which can cause head aches and aching eyes. Not worth a buy, maybe if they priced it the same as DLC it would be worth your cash. For players that played Battlefield Bad Company 2 it's basically like the Vietnam DLC.… Expand
  60. PostMortem22988
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    I think I know what the problem is. Instead of releasing this 'game' as more DLC, They added a number three to the title. Single player is, well, let's face it, another MW game, Just like the others. The only way it could be made any simpler is by... Hell, I can't think of anything. MW3 Multiplayer is almost the worst thing that I have ever subjected myself to... And trust me, I have doneI think I know what the problem is. Instead of releasing this 'game' as more DLC, They added a number three to the title. Single player is, well, let's face it, another MW game, Just like the others. The only way it could be made any simpler is by... Hell, I can't think of anything. MW3 Multiplayer is almost the worst thing that I have ever subjected myself to... And trust me, I have done some pretty stupid things. If given the choice, now I can say with complete and utter honesty that if it came to playing this game again, or going out like Cobain... Get ready to renovate the house.

    I guess the only thing left to do is wait for Treyarch to come in and save the COD franchise.    … Expand
  61. kristoficus
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    This review is based entirely on the multiplayer element because that is the true value of a game, especially when it's campaign is 'only' about 3-4 hours. I have not yet played the campaign but if it's anything like previous CoD games, it should be varied, fun & interesting... probably with a bad ending...

    Okay, first impression was insanely bad. I have a 460GTX 768MB so I turned all    This review is based entirely on the multiplayer element because that is the true value of a game, especially when it's campaign is 'only' about 3-4 hours. I have not yet played the campaign but if it's anything like previous CoD games, it should be varied, fun & interesting... probably with a bad ending...

    Okay, first impression was insanely bad. I have a 460GTX 768MB so I turned all settings up to their max on a 1080P resolution. FPS was not an issue, but the graphics certainly were! Horrible anti-aliasing, really poor textures... it looked like a 10 year old game. And then I discovered an illogical and backwards 'native' image quality actually made the game look semi-decent. Now it only looks like a 6 year old game... well, I guess in a way it is, since it runs on a modified/updated IW Engine from 2005.

    Call of Duty games have always been good for their "jump in, shoot, end game" style where you can complete an entire game in about 5 minutes, easy to kill and get a good score making you think you are amazing (when in fact just mediocre). Sure, you have fun doing it but it lacks style and substance.

    Compare it to Battlefield 3 (amazing, by the way!) which has massive maps and unique game styles. If you play as a medic you actually need to think like a medic. Play as a sniper and think like a sniper. With CoD, it's nowhere like that. Where are the vehicles? Such a disappointment compared to BF3. Please forgive me for what looks like I'm slating this game, but I used to be a die-hard CoD fan and I have to admit right now, I've not had much fun with previous Battlefield games. But if you do a direct comparison between CoD:MW3 and BF3, the difference is night and day. In fact, in making the comparison I am only showing further just how good BF3 is, and how MW3 shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence.

    Please Activision... Stop using CoD as your yearly cash cow. Can you remember the first Call of Duty, where it was PC only? Yeah, you used your PC gaming base to build on an amazing foundation which carried onto united offensive, and to an extend... CoD 2. Your first venture into the console market with CoD 3 was a major slap in the face not only to PC gamers who couldn't get it, but the console gamers who were given a poor experience.

    Go back to your roots - get rid of the nade spam, do away with the stupid perks... Bring us back a realistic and authentic FPS gaming experience and please don't treat those you BUILT the CoD fanbase and foundation like a used plaster. WE are the reason your franchise is so successful so don't give us poor console ports! Make CoD fun again, because if you don't... I may very well swallow a difficult pill and completely turn my back on you. DICE and EA (even with their shoddy Origin...) are looking very easy to build a new allegiance with, and I hope you can turn things around.

    We want:

    A brand new engine (no modifications, no updates!) to give us true next-gen graphics and visuals
    Unmatched realism - high quality textures, authentic sounds, true-to-life gameplay
    Longer and more immersive campaigns that play like an epic cinematic movie
    Better multiplayer "hit points" (if I put a single bullet in someones head they really should die...)
    Do away with perks. They don't help with realism! Take things back to basics - a soldier, a gun, and nothing but the gamers skill.

    Ohh the list goes on... but we've been asking this for years so why continue when it's clear you are in the business of making money rather than giving your fans what they want...    … Expand
  62. MRGamer
    Nov 15, 2011
    3
    The single player campaign is fair, a bit short but comparable to MW2. I liked doing missions again with a certain character that returns in MW3. The multiplayer gives me a sinking feeling of "here we go again" with the IWnet experience: lag, hackers, hacked lobbies. Contrary to what the dev has stated, there are no "improvements" to be seen in this game. It is MW2 all over again. TheThe single player campaign is fair, a bit short but comparable to MW2. I liked doing missions again with a certain character that returns in MW3. The multiplayer gives me a sinking feeling of "here we go again" with the IWnet experience: lag, hackers, hacked lobbies. Contrary to what the dev has stated, there are no "improvements" to be seen in this game. It is MW2 all over again. The selection of maps is duller than ever, and the majority of the maps are constructed to only support run and gun, fish in a barrel gameplay. the multiplayer experience is bad.

    Activision again chips away at PC features in the game- no ranked dedicated servers, no FOV adjustment, small maps and small player numbers. As a previous reviewer stated, if you have not wasted your money on MW3 yet, stick to MW or Black Ops. Nothing worth the price of admission in this one.    … Expand
  63. geckomist
    Nov 15, 2011
    1
    I found it hard to give this game any credit at all. It has the exact same feel as MW2 and barely makes a visual improvement. I feel like I'm just playing another useless DLC map pack. With MW2 being a mediocre production and a betrayal on all PC first person shooter players, MW3 finds a way to act like they care and then slap you in the face over and over. With the massive outcry of PCI found it hard to give this game any credit at all. It has the exact same feel as MW2 and barely makes a visual improvement. I feel like I'm just playing another useless DLC map pack. With MW2 being a mediocre production and a betrayal on all PC first person shooter players, MW3 finds a way to act like they care and then slap you in the face over and over. With the massive outcry of PC gamers to include dedicated servers and the ability to control your games with console commands, IW finally adds these abilities (hidden deep in the settings) but does not allow you to gain any level or custom classes on dedicated servers. What?? That is the leading reason and enjoyment that most people get out of COD games. What reasoning do I have to join a dedicated server then? Looks like everyone will be forced to remain with no servers. Time for more of the same game full of hackers, no administrators to keep order, hosts dropping or having mediocre PC's that completely interrupt gameplay, lag lag lag and more lag. It's pretty obvious the reasoning that COD games are taking more and more control away from the user. They hide under this facade that they are making the game better and to keep people from abusing it. It's pretty obvious that all of this happens worse than before. They don't want dedicated servers, any user control of your settings (like console commands), custom community maps, etc. It's so that once the next game in the series is out, there will be no reason for people to stick to the old games and therefore get more sales. Gone are the days of playing in servers with clans and establishing a community of friends and regulars to play in your server with your variation of the rules. Don't like it? Then move on to another server until you find people you like to play with and rules that suite your style. COD will be given a 10 from me the very day that they release a game for PC gamers like COD used to be (not a console port), with dedicated servers (that people have a reason to play in and actually rank and level), larger number of player slots (for server owners to choose if they'd like), original and well built maps, custom community maps (for people to show their creativity and love of the game and create their own fun), and no paid DLC with an actual complete game upon release. Get the message Infinity Ward, you've made mediocre games and your constantly insulting gamers with your greed, power, and big heads.… Expand
  64. RECON-UK
    Nov 24, 2011
    4
    I will be very honest with this game.
    firstly it runs great on my pc and is very well optimised.
    The bad things are everything else. There is no dedicated servers, people are already hacking and their are many prestige 10 people after 3 days!!. I have gotten to level 40 (rank) in multiplayer and have had such a frustrating time due to the same old thing as MW2. Example:    I will be very honest with this game.
    firstly it runs great on my pc and is very well optimised.
    The bad things are everything else.
    There is no dedicated servers, people are already hacking and their are many prestige 10 people after 3 days!!.
    I have gotten to level 40 (rank) in multiplayer and have had such a frustrating time due to the same old thing as MW2. Example: Tubes,UMP,prestige 10 hackers,wallhacks and general disregard to any pc user in this modern day and age.
    The graphics are ok but nothing new.
    The gameplay is mediocre due to it been the same as MW2.
    I wanted something different like black ops was to MW2, but no they failed with this release.
    Only true die hard fanboys and kids with no sense will play this game all the way through.

    For the above reasons this game scores a 4 out of 10.    … Expand
  65. mob0103
    Nov 24, 2011
    4
    Multiplayer seems unbalanced at the moment and the respawns are terrible. Improvements have been made in the lobby system, have had no random dropouts or long wait times which I always had a problem with in MW2. If the spawns are addressed and the weapons fine tuned ( FM9 Akimbo WTF!! ) then my opinion may change. I actually prefer Black Ops to the latest release. I NEVER thought I wouldMultiplayer seems unbalanced at the moment and the respawns are terrible. Improvements have been made in the lobby system, have had no random dropouts or long wait times which I always had a problem with in MW2. If the spawns are addressed and the weapons fine tuned ( FM9 Akimbo WTF!! ) then my opinion may change. I actually prefer Black Ops to the latest release. I NEVER thought I would think that..… Expand
  66. Pivot1022
    Dec 21, 2011
    1
    So you enjoy playing Cod 4? Cod WaW? Cod MW2? Cod BO? well good news, this is the EXACT SAME GAME! no difference, you just bought mw2... good job IW you rereleased mw2... again... **** you if you brought this overbloated piece of ****
  67. seuche
    Dec 24, 2011
    0
    it is just a graphical mod for the last cod... or the cod the year befor that... only 2 new features and the rest is the same. no innovation or creativity went into this game. its just an unaspiring commissional work.
  68. ATFDrEvil
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    I came into MW3 with a clean slate. I decided to see if Sledgehammer, Infinity Ward 2.0, and Raven Software could make this game, feel new and refreshing... Graphic's are recycled, game play is the same as it's been, nothing feels new. The Campaign is boring from the start, I couldn't even stomach it. Multilayer is a recycled joke. Sorry but I can't even give this game a 1 based on myI came into MW3 with a clean slate. I decided to see if Sledgehammer, Infinity Ward 2.0, and Raven Software could make this game, feel new and refreshing... Graphic's are recycled, game play is the same as it's been, nothing feels new. The Campaign is boring from the start, I couldn't even stomach it. Multilayer is a recycled joke. Sorry but I can't even give this game a 1 based on my experience with the game.… Expand
  69. BiggieJohn
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    another year another cod.

    No dedicated server support as usual. Everything is the same as mw2 besides campaign and new maps.

    It's not even a rent just play mw2 if you still have it.
  70. omgurheadsgone
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Maps lack the simplicity of the previous Modern Warfare's in the franchise, littered with useless junk every step of the way, and all sorts of little nooks and cranny's for your neighborhood camper to hide, these are just the basis of the problems with the third installment of "Infinity Ward's" Modern Warfare. Without Infinity Wards full development of the game, it feels that the newMaps lack the simplicity of the previous Modern Warfare's in the franchise, littered with useless junk every step of the way, and all sorts of little nooks and cranny's for your neighborhood camper to hide, these are just the basis of the problems with the third installment of "Infinity Ward's" Modern Warfare. Without Infinity Wards full development of the game, it feels that the new sledgehammer partner involved with activision has taken a more treyarch feel to the game, especially involving the design and over-all feel of the guns. I think that activision should strongly consider a major patch for the game, involving a stopping power perk, and/or a slight boost to the damage of all the guns, as well an attempt to fix the horrendous Hit-Detection in the game, and the release of some bigger, less cluttered maps. I am very disappointed in this game over-all, as it feels like an absolute half ass attempt to add better graphics (essentially just by adding garbage and crap all over the maps, and making them as cluttered as possible), and just over all poor map structure and game-play, I'm left with no choice but to return it as I am simply just not enjoying it at all. Keep in mind I have 46 days clocked on MW2, and am 10th prestige in MW1, this will be the first Modern Warfare I do not play because it is simply poorly designed. Better luck next time activision, Sincerely,
    OMGurHeadsGone    … Expand
  71. Speedhorn
    Nov 16, 2011
    2
    Haven't I played this game already? Why yes, yes I have. This is poor, it is the same ol same ol. I'm half expecting a zombie DLC to be released soon, thus completing Cliché Warfare 3.
  72. lordofthebumz
    Dec 1, 2011
    4
    Single player was ok. The first level was excellent and thats about it. I got about 60% of the game finished and had to force myself to play the rest. I couldn't feel the excitement from sneaking past guards when u attacked Makarovs hideout. The game was holding my hand to much. The hardest difficulty is to easy. With mouse and keyboard I couldn't find a challenge. I got bored of justSingle player was ok. The first level was excellent and thats about it. I got about 60% of the game finished and had to force myself to play the rest. I couldn't feel the excitement from sneaking past guards when u attacked Makarovs hideout. The game was holding my hand to much. The hardest difficulty is to easy. With mouse and keyboard I couldn't find a challenge. I got bored of just running through the levels at super speed. Multiplayer: I got to about level 40 in multiplayer and I don't want to ever play again. In MW2 i got to prestige 3 and BLOPS I got prestige 6. Its just run and gun and at lightning speed. All maps feel like nuketown of BLOPS. The levels are to small. Not really any new MP mechanics. Only a few new attachments and a few new kill streaks. Tired of guns with no recoil. Graphics are terrible for this game. With the amout of money they spent to make it they could invest in some upgrades. Its really looking outdated now. DO NOT BUY THIS GAME WASTE OF $60 ! Also the map packs? 3 of them for 15 each? So you need to spend $105 + tax to buy this?… Expand
  73. voiders
    May 10, 2013
    0
    Lets start the story, first i love fps games, but since CS i stoped play. Last year I buy BF3 and CSGO, but I was willing some COD, becouse that franchise are so famous.

    This weak i play this game for free, and cant belive why people buy so much this game. The gameplay are horrible, the character moviment is a joke. The animations is like games from 10 years ago. The weapon is so    Lets start the story, first i love fps games, but since CS i stoped play. Last year I buy BF3 and CSGO, but I was willing some COD, becouse that franchise are so famous.

    This weak i play this game for free, and cant belive why people buy so much this game. The gameplay are horrible, the character moviment is a joke. The animations is like games from 10 years ago.

    The weapon is so artificial, Battlefield is so much professional than COD. COD has the worst fake gameplay ever. Dont buy this game just becouse that is famous.    … Expand
  74. SteveMac
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Same boring game as MW2 was. It doesn't look like anything has happened since then - No extra features, or thought has gone into it. Black Ops had more features, dedicated servers, lean, a console, diving, flyable killstreaks, max fps alterations, fov.

    The game has gone backwards - and with P2P game play in multi player, this makes it one of the worst games to date.
  75. Tanques
    Nov 16, 2011
    2
    awful game, poor campaign, same multiplayer as it was 2 years ago. The game is boring nothing new if you compare it to MW2. fail of the franchise.
  76. Wazler
    Nov 11, 2011
    1
    This review is for you Sledgehammer. You ask to people to give a good mark, but Modern Warfare 3 is a poor game ! You should use your talent for another that Activision ;)
  77. spartan117gw
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    Game had such high expectations. I atleast expected to enjoy it. Campaign is fun but forgettable. spec ops is fun but cheap. the Multiplayer is FAIL. **** maps. **** gameplay. gfx fail. sound design fail. just its a solid piece of **** well back to BF3 even though that game had a flakey campaign atleast the multiplayer of that one rocks.
  78. hiddenpheonix
    Apr 29, 2012
    0
    Its the same old tired game. Why call it a new game or even throwing away the title "cal of duty" unless has some form of insult to previous developers.
    MW3 is a another map expansion to MW2. In fact, if they would have released it as a map expansion less people would've had called it crap.
    And watch the imbalanced scores between those who write about games and those who play them.
  79. Nytrox
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    I've been almost a COD fan when the first 4-5 titles came out, i remember playing the second which had a stunning mulitplayer and well-defined maps, then when the 4th came out i literally **** i mean, the weapons were just amazing and the gameplay unique, way different from the first or the second. And activision knew that they could use that formula again, and so they did with WAW, whichI've been almost a COD fan when the first 4-5 titles came out, i remember playing the second which had a stunning mulitplayer and well-defined maps, then when the 4th came out i literally **** i mean, the weapons were just amazing and the gameplay unique, way different from the first or the second. And activision knew that they could use that formula again, and so they did with WAW, which wasnt anything special, but at least added something more, the "Prestige" which can be both boring for a casual player, but fun for someone who spends lots of time on that game, because it can multiply the lenght of the game (i find it kinda stupid, tbh). Same **** happened to MW2, only this time not much changed from the previous title, just different weapons... or not... i mean they all have like 0 recoil and LOADS of damage, what about black ops? Same **** OH WHAT DO WE HAVE NOW? 15 PRESTIGES? Are you nuts? But then here it comes, MW3. A game that just took mw2 and did "CTRL C - CTRL V", LITERALLY. Oh i forgot to talk about the storyline! WAR WAR WAR, [spoiler] you win and everybody is happy except ghost, roach and soap that dies. Activision got some creative minds!… Expand
  80. worldcitizen19
    Nov 15, 2011
    0
    I enjoyed Black Ops but this is terribly boring and the graphics/story are aweful. I have bought and played BF3 also and I quite enjoyed rolling into the mountains of Iran and fighting in Tehran. It really had some atmosphere about it but MW3 is just recent MW games with a 3 stuck on the end. I'm glad I got mine for half price. Feel very sorry for those who shelled out $99 on Steam.
  81. CrockD
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    I'd love to know why Metacritic is now not displaying the user review score for this years Madden...umm I mean Modern Warfare iteration. The way this whole thing has gone down (high critic reviews, low user reviews) says a lot about the current model for gaming reviews. The reviewers are WAY to cozy with the game creators and publishers and it shows when critics continue to give veryI'd love to know why Metacritic is now not displaying the user review score for this years Madden...umm I mean Modern Warfare iteration. The way this whole thing has gone down (high critic reviews, low user reviews) says a lot about the current model for gaming reviews. The reviewers are WAY to cozy with the game creators and publishers and it shows when critics continue to give very high marks for what is essentially a repackaged version of the same game every freaking year. Battlefield 3 has its issues (Battlelog, Origin, etc) but at least DICE and EA provide something new that drives gaming development (Frostbite 2.0). Activision just executes the ol' annual payment model for the same crap. Give them their due, it's a great racket, but it leaves a very bitter taste in the mouths of gamers who want something new.… Expand
  82. GregA
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    No dedicated servers. Not all the SP guns are in MP. Getting an error and the game keeps crashing on the same level. Hamburg map if I took one route I'd get kicked to the menu and have to restart. Froze once, had to restart my PC. COD reset my controls to default in both MP and SP. Still better then the abortion Black Ops is.
  83. Gabbo
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. After MW2's incredibly stupid story line, i wasn't expecting much but i was still let down... somehow. Everything is predictable, and SPOILERALERT just about everyone with a name dies, predictably and/or implausibly. each mission sends you along, you gain support which is always, ALWAYS obliterated in some fashion, nothing goes according to plan. I predicted the "twists" well in advance. They essentially take everything from MW1 and 2 that they thought worked and pasted it together. you will find yourself knocked down and crawling more times than i can count. characters die heroically for absolutely no reason, multiple times to patriotic tunes. this MW bring the times makarov kills the player up by a couple tallies too... This was purly on the single player aspect, i assume its entirely identical to MW2 in muiltiplayer… Expand
  84. marsx
    Nov 14, 2011
    1
    Gra beznadziejna nie opÅ
  85. madpistol
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    No ranked dedicated servers, same mechanics as MW2, reused buildings, boring and overused game play, multi-player is stale, engine is dated, graphics are the same as the original Modern Warfare. People are buying into the hype. Not this guy. This game is worth about $20 if that, yet tons of fanboys will continue to buy it. How sad.
  86. Boomer8u
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    Ok to some this game up, just play that two or so games in the series. For starters lets look at the campaign, I would much rather play the first chapter in the original Crysis. Even in a game thats almost 4 years old, Mw3 gets its $!*# rocked as far as graphics go. As a lot of people have said the campaign is like walking down a hallway shooting pop up bad guys with explosions every fewOk to some this game up, just play that two or so games in the series. For starters lets look at the campaign, I would much rather play the first chapter in the original Crysis. Even in a game thats almost 4 years old, Mw3 gets its $!*# rocked as far as graphics go. As a lot of people have said the campaign is like walking down a hallway shooting pop up bad guys with explosions every few minutes. The only reason Im giving this game a four is the online play. A lot of people are comparing it to the last few fames and saying that it sucks but, the modern warfare games are almost a hands down winner. The fun in a lot of games now is the online play and Infinity Ward (or what's left of it), Sledgehammer Games and Raven Software have recognized that and capitalized on that. But like i said before, the graphics, your ability to interact with everything, and any thing else left such. To some this whole review up in a few word, everything sucks besides the shooting online.… Expand
  87. chead
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    So I've literally played COD to death... from the first release.. UO expansion, up to black ops. I've had little quibbles with all the releases but after a day of playing it I've loved all of them, except for this one. One thing that stayed decently constant with COD was the maps... They were all big, and you could tell they spent time thinking them out when they made them. In this newestSo I've literally played COD to death... from the first release.. UO expansion, up to black ops. I've had little quibbles with all the releases but after a day of playing it I've loved all of them, except for this one. One thing that stayed decently constant with COD was the maps... They were all big, and you could tell they spent time thinking them out when they made them. In this newest edition of COD the maps are so small and awful it makes me think I'm playing a totally different game... If you're going to basically re-release your last game, at least give it just as good, if not better, maps...… Expand
  88. TheRatedD
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    This game is just more of the same. I couldn't stand the singleplayer. It's like I had already played everything in there before and they ran out of ideas (shocking right?) and they even took the idea of the no gravity section from Killzone 3. Go buy Uncharted 3 instead of this steaming pile of dog dump.
  89. GutterGoneWild
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    I think my review will be similar to many of the others that have posted. There is nothing new and absolutely zero reason for this to be a $60 "new game" as apposed to a $20 downloadable map pack. Hopefully the next iteration will include a new engine or at least a decent amount of tinkering so that it can be worthy of being called a new game.
  90. Wellesley
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I give this game a 4/10 because I actually bothered to finish it and it didn't crash to desktop once.
    Now to get on to why the game doesn't deserve a score higher than that:
    1. The graphics are abysmal, have not been improved since Call of Duty 4, and are actually worse on the PC since the render resolution is locked to 720p and upscaled horribly if you set it to a higher resolution than that. This makes it obvious that it's just a bad console port and the appropriate amount of attention was not paid to the PC version.
    2. The gameplay is tired, uninspired and boring. Shooting hordes of enemies with terrible AI that respawn until you move to an arbitrary position on the map may have been fun back in 2003 (hell, it may have been fun in 2007), but it's getting old now. This is the same game as before just in a different place, only now the bad guys are even harder to see and distinguish from enemies because the world is even greyer and everyone is wearing grey.
    3. The story is horrible. The pacing is entirely off and relies on cheap tricks and setpieces that would have been exciting four years ago, but just seem clichéd now. For example, there are so many instances in this game where you'll be heading to the "extraction zone" or whatever and your means of escape will explode. This was only ever exciting once, not the twelfth time you pull it on the player. Another gripe with the story is the horribly put together shock scene involving the death of a child. For a start, the tone was never properly established, so it just seem shoehorned in, it never made sense that there were carefree American tourists on holiday in the UK when their country was being invaded, and the whole scene smacks of a pathetic attempt to create controversy to gain sales. Not to mention that the general plot itself is the same. A Russian guy is trying to create a conflict to take over the world or establish Russian dominance again or something, it's never really clear, and so the merry band of SAS and American soldiers have to team up to stop the nukes. Seem familiar? It should do if you've played Call of Duty 4.
    4. The Multiplayer. It's the same as Modern Warfare 2. If you liked that you'll like this, but if you got used to the improvements made in BlackOps then I have disappointing news for you. The dedicated servers are not ranked and the matchmaking is awful. The gunplay is worse and there are confirmed day-one aim hacks.

    Altogether, this is a lazy game that was obviously rushed out in a year to make truckloads of cash with a minimum of effort. Judging from the preorder sales alone, it has already done that, but regardless of this I do not recommend you buy it. It's a tired rehash of previous games in the series and the loss of the creative minds behind Infinity Ward to Respawn Entertainment shows very much. The only reason to buy this game is if you want more of the same multiplayer experience you got in Modern Warfare 2.    … Expand
  91. Biko357
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    For the full Written review please refer to the modern warfare 2 review :P ,,,

    Online : Sucks ..... Really Sucks

    ,,graphics : I won't rate that LOL

    ,,Story : Awesome! ( thats why I gave It one of ten :D :D
  92. Azraelbears
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    what can i say that hasn't already been said? Well i can admit i don't own the game, but thats because i PLAYED IT on a friend's computer and was completely blown away by how right i was. I didn't expect much, but i was hoping for at least a little innovation....which of course, there is none. Black ops was not for me for several reasons but it atleast brought a little to the series,what can i say that hasn't already been said? Well i can admit i don't own the game, but thats because i PLAYED IT on a friend's computer and was completely blown away by how right i was. I didn't expect much, but i was hoping for at least a little innovation....which of course, there is none. Black ops was not for me for several reasons but it atleast brought a little to the series, however this pile of garbage should be abolished. Activision should be ashamed of themselves, this is a slap in the face for any serious developer. BF3 is not quite as good as i hoped, but its fun as hell....very hard, but very fun and they made several significant changes to keep the game fresh and interesting. COD has done nothing but use the same crap year after year, i was hoping for a graphics overhaul at a minimum to compete with BF3. I was let down yet again.......... playing this first was the best thing i could have done, i already bought MW1 and i don't need another copy cramping my hard drive, especially not for $60. I wouldn't pay $20 for this piece of crap, leave it for the 13 year olds with hard-ons and move on to another game. BF3 has several flaws, but they are easy fixed with patches, for free. COD won't do anything but add extra bathroom-sized map packs for $20 and call it an improvement.… Expand
  93. Ezzyduzzit
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    They might as well start putting the year next to the COD series similar to Madden, it's just astonishing to me that it comes out 4 years later and it's basically MW2.1. I guess all they have over there are map creators because people keep sending them cash for more maps. For those of you who don't realize you're being taken advantage of please wake up, this kinda crap is detrimentalThey might as well start putting the year next to the COD series similar to Madden, it's just astonishing to me that it comes out 4 years later and it's basically MW2.1. I guess all they have over there are map creators because people keep sending them cash for more maps. For those of you who don't realize you're being taken advantage of please wake up, this kinda crap is detrimental to the industry. I hope everyone is seeing the negative effects the console introduces on real gaming… Expand
  94. Sammeal
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Come on Activision, are you the new EA Sports? This game innovates so little you would think it was a yearly Madden update. This mostly could have been a map pack update for Black Ops. Get your stuff together! Take a year off maybe and make a better game, not something that could have been an expansion pack.
  95. ObeseCatLord
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    This game is terrible, it just comes to show how stupid people are today, simply buying the same badly made game over and over again for 60 bucks each year not including the 15 bucks a piece while games like killzone have their map packs for 2 dollars a piece with more and better maps.
  96. Xeoneth
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    I loved COD4MW and MW2, hated black ops and thats why I had big hopes for MW3. Lot of hype and big expectations for MW3... finally when I had the games in my hand I was confused, I thought that I had inserted MW2 cd instead of MW3 but... no it was MW3 that at the end was just a 60 bucks MW2 DLC... really disappointed *sigh*
  97. ctoctocto
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Many people said is the same MW2 game. they was wrong, MW2 was a very good game but MW3 is just crap,it is the worst multiplayer game ever, Maps are small, boring and all of them look similar. and the match making system oh yes good for meet people form other continent. Good work guys......
  98. kolaborr
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Like Modern Warfare 2 and Black OPS Modern Warfare3 is a cash w***re NOTHING else. I wonder what happend with this generation? Modern Warfare 3 has only flaws - 5 hour single campaign, much worse Multiplayer (Battlefield 3 ROXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX), and last but not least graphics looks like S**IT

    Single player story = absolutelllly stuupid garbage for 13 years old with 60 IQ. Modern Cash    Like Modern Warfare 2 and Black OPS Modern Warfare3 is a cash w***re NOTHING else. I wonder what happend with this generation? Modern Warfare 3 has only flaws - 5 hour single campaign, much worse Multiplayer (Battlefield 3 ROXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX), and last but not least graphics looks like S**IT

    Single player story = absolutelllly stuupid garbage for 13 years old with 60 IQ. Modern Cash Who*e 3

    ooh and yes this game runs well even on my netbook.... shame shame shame!    … Expand
  99. Teng
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    Nice Single Player so far but too short. The rest is the same as every year. I sold it and play Modern Warfare 2009 instead. But it doesn't matter what all the people are writing here, as long as everyone buy this Map-Pack for 60â
  100. Gage47
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Mindless, rehashed garbage. This game is an insult to the intelligence of the consumer. Fool us once, shame on you, fool us twice shame on you. Enough is enough, from now on we have only ourselves to blame for continuing to load the pockets of the corporate swines that are KILLING the gaming industry with recycled tripe.
Page:

Awards & Rankings

59
#59 Best PC Game of 2011
4
#4 Most Discussed PC Game of 2011
27
#27 Most Shared PC Game of 2011

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
78

Generally favorable reviews - based on 26 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 19 out of 26
  2. Mixed: 7 out of 26
  3. Negative: 0 out of 26
  1. Computer Games Online RO
    Apr 10, 2012
    82
    Thus, I can't recommend buying this unless you (still) like the fast pace, the customizable weaponry and the short matches, of about 10 minutes each. With the very important mention that, essentially, nothing has changed.
    Read full review
  2. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Jan 20, 2012
    80
    Stunning campaign with epic moments makes this third installment of Modern Warfare a great show with the best approach to players. No need to mention an excellent multiplayer. [Dec 2011]
  3. PC PowerPlay
    Jan 9, 2012
    50
    If you own any previous COD, there's little reason to buy MW3. [Jan 2012, p.50]
See all critic reviews »