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. DonCanardo
    Jan 18, 2012
    3
    I loved all call of duty games, but enough is enough, if you are bored of the MW2, don't buy this one, it's roughly the same game, you'll be bored after few hours. Would have been a decent DLC for MW2. Maps sucks. I feel like the following features went less and less good from MW1 to MW2 to MV3 : Graphics, weapons sounds effect, Weapons, Maps.
  2. Echo9k
    Jun 1, 2012
    3
    "2.2It is very bad rating" That was what I thought the first time.

    But after having played 42 hours of MP and 45 of SP I realized that deserves that rating. MW series are based on the same game engine, but this time it seems how if I'd be playing MW2. But not at all. In fact, in this new release has issues diminished. One of those problems is when a mag is out. Reload it's something    "2.2It is very bad rating" That was what I thought the first time.

    But after having played 42 hours of MP and 45 of SP I realized that deserves that rating.

    MW series are based on the same game engine, but this time it seems how if I'd be playing MW2.

    But not at all. In fact, in this new release has issues diminished. One of those problems is when a mag is out. Reload it's something frustrating: game, audio, and visuals are not synchronized n' the time of passion in which caresses the gun after changing it is still too much. If you like run, run, and RUN! you'll have problems too, getting stuck everywhere.
    I almost forgot this little big one, that curious style of "lag" when you crash head on with another player and your character moves erratically .. . yes, I hate that.

    My suggestion? Get a pirate copy, rent it, order it loaned, whatever. If u think that MW3 deserves your money above other games, GO! buy it bro, but not before 30 hours of game-play. First get the experience of what is actually MW3    … Expand
  3. JeremyEr10
    May 4, 2012
    3
    Modern Warfare 3 fails in every aspect for a sequel with such high "expectations"
    The game has barely been improved, yet, it brags as if it's a masterpiece.

    Only twelve year old's play this piece of crap.

    RIP MW
    2007-2009
  4. Realistic123
    Jun 17, 2012
    3
    It may appear to be a repeat to MW2, but a further look into it shows the only similarity is the engine. The game faces balancing issues with many of the weapons, including the akimbo function on some of the machine pistols. Duel wielding may be bad ass, but in a serious fps it is cheap sad to have them so strong - especially because it has no realistic values. I don't play for the singleIt may appear to be a repeat to MW2, but a further look into it shows the only similarity is the engine. The game faces balancing issues with many of the weapons, including the akimbo function on some of the machine pistols. Duel wielding may be bad ass, but in a serious fps it is cheap sad to have them so strong - especially because it has no realistic values. I don't play for the single player version, and mostly play only multiplayer. It gets harder and harder to play the game with the constant annoyance of a poor game community of young and immature players, that you would not usually find in an mmo rpg or an rts. Almost half the games you enter will consist of 4-5 people using the same exact weapon/class setup in order to get easy kills and rank up fast. Ranking up in the game is tedius and, well, fairly pointless. No real achievment goes into obtaining the max level because so many people venture off into a hacked lobby or use hacks in-game to get cheap kills. The valve anti-cheat system is sad, as all they do is check the leader boards. A lot of the hackers will simply (and yes, I mean simply) alter their leader boards to make their kill to death ration more reasonable - avoiding the ban hammer (as they call it). The worst part is they are probably working on the next modern warfare, allowing these issues to go unnoticed. They base their support system on a social networking site which is a face palm in my book.… Expand
  5. lode07
    Jul 16, 2012
    3
    All I will say is that I am glad I bought this game in the sale for £19.99. The story is rubbish, the levels are boring and the game feels like it should have been a DLC pack for MW2. The multiplayer is not as much fun as MW2. I feel sorry for anyone suckered in enough to buy this at full price. Hmm, come to think of it, I am mad with myself for spending £20 on the game!!
  6. BloodaspFZR
    Sep 14, 2012
    3
    The game is good, but it's ruined by the idiotic community, most likely all the battlefield and other rival named games who come in just to ruin this game, They abuse Activision + Infinity ward's idiotic idea's of using the Valve's Steam system as the anticheat, which everyone knows does not work and just supports cheating in games. So the major problem with the game is its good, but theThe game is good, but it's ruined by the idiotic community, most likely all the battlefield and other rival named games who come in just to ruin this game, They abuse Activision + Infinity ward's idiotic idea's of using the Valve's Steam system as the anticheat, which everyone knows does not work and just supports cheating in games. So the major problem with the game is its good, but the cheaters ruin it to hell.… Expand
  7. KingJailson
    Dec 14, 2018
    3
    Meu cod favorito, mas infelizmente na versão de pc o jogo foi dominado pelos hackers, abusadores do mw3sa e campers de akimbo, o que destruiu a diversão do jogo, triste
  8. r03vg
    Apr 17, 2020
    3
    Вы ведь тоже не понимаете, о чем вообще эта игра? Все еще старый движок, убогая графика и дурацкий тир.
  9. Dalek
    Aug 18, 2013
    2
    The singleplayer is ok, they have improved it a little bit but the campaign is still very short (6 hours) and the multiplayer is just a joke. I hate the feel of it, and everything is just unbalanced such as the spawn points, weapon damage, and so on. The only thing I really enjoyed was the survival and challenges. But thats it.
  10. nirvycn
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    Overall Disapointing. This is Clearly MW2 redone. Many error messages refer to MW2 when it crashes, many of the ini files still say MW2. The graphics are now dated, and nothing has been done to improve them since MW2. the SP story is still as inane and bizarre as always, and very short, it only took me 3 hours or so to complete it. MP is okay, pretty much the same as blops with some newOverall Disapointing. This is Clearly MW2 redone. Many error messages refer to MW2 when it crashes, many of the ini files still say MW2. The graphics are now dated, and nothing has been done to improve them since MW2. the SP story is still as inane and bizarre as always, and very short, it only took me 3 hours or so to complete it. MP is okay, pretty much the same as blops with some new perks and maps. More of the same so many will likeit.

    Over all i dont think this was worth £40, it feels more like a map-pack and new scenario.    … Expand
  11. Bobaganoosh
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    I'll give them two points for continuing their tried and true formula, but nothing more as that's all they've done here. They just put mw2 in a new box. $60 + $7/month for new maps and perks but nothing new in terms of gameplay or graphics? No thanks. Save your money folks. If you have cod4 than what's the point of this? Not a new game
  12. kartana
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    Tiny maps, arcadish and twitch based gameplay, recycled textures and buildings, the same awful matchmaking system etc. But the real problem is not Activision releasing the same game every year, it's the people buying the same game year after year.
  13. Tomeepapa
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    I have bought but I was regretted it absolutely. It's a big disappointment.
    I'm not talikng about graphics because we know its almost a 10 years old engine but the game mechanics overall nothing new. Small maps no chance to put some tactical elements everybody just run and jump like a mad bunny. For me its a modern brainless quake, so its a shame. I have a feeling I have been sold.
  14. Trodamus
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    At this point, CoD is a measure of the success of a popular formula and great PR, that somehow remains undiminished even after a nearly identical (re) release year after year. What's it bringing to the table?

    Do you guys remember when FPS games used to have to bring something new each year? Doom 2 had the double-barrel shotgun, Quake2/3 had single/multiplayer, Unreal Tournament added    At this point, CoD is a measure of the success of a popular formula and great PR, that somehow remains undiminished even after a nearly identical (re) release year after year. What's it bringing to the table?

    Do you guys remember when FPS games used to have to bring something new each year? Doom 2 had the double-barrel shotgun, Quake2/3 had single/multiplayer, Unreal Tournament added mission-based deathamtch, then ragdoll physics, then awesome vehicle modes, even Halo tries to add some new and interesting weapons and vehicles at each outting.

    What does CoD give us? A rather high price tag, and if past releases are any indication, map packs that are old content re-released for a premium.    … Expand
  15. PanCirno
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    it's **** horrible that kotick wants to pander to his teenage penisless slow in their minds fanbase with grimdark themes like killing off a kid in front of them, kids should play recettear not this garbage
  16. Ravager
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    I've played through the singleplayer and enough hours of the multiplayer to get a good idea of what the game is like. The singleplayer is terrible, like all of the recent games, but with an even sillier plot. This is forgivable however - who plays this game for the singleplayer? The multiplayer... well... its the exact same thing as the previous two. And to be honest, I'm sick of it. SureI've played through the singleplayer and enough hours of the multiplayer to get a good idea of what the game is like. The singleplayer is terrible, like all of the recent games, but with an even sillier plot. This is forgivable however - who plays this game for the singleplayer? The multiplayer... well... its the exact same thing as the previous two. And to be honest, I'm sick of it. Sure the previous games were good, but you can only play so much of it before getting bored. Infinity Ward could have at least TRIED to change things up but they didn't. And I feel ripped off for paying full price for it, something like this should be an expansion or DLC or something. It doesn't justify purchasing a new game.

    Unless you really REALLY want it, just play MW2. You'll be getting the exact same experience and you'll be $60 richer.    … Expand
  17. DaftBehemoth
    Nov 13, 2011
    2
    This game is an insult to gamers everywhere. It's a repackage of MW2 (a great game) for another 60 dollars. Had Activision charged 30 dollars for MW3 and called it an expansion, I wouldn't be so mad... as it stands? **** Activision.
  18. GrimmEvil
    Jul 29, 2012
    2
    Multiplayer Blah blah blah garbage poop blah garbage... Honestly, this is a $60 DLC, this is Modern Warfare 2.21 at best, and a crapload more DLCS making this rehashed game worth more than $100 of instant garbage so they can sell millions of copies to console fanboys, this game wasn't developed for PC players. Just another year of stale gameplay with slightly new features and changes, butMultiplayer Blah blah blah garbage poop blah garbage... Honestly, this is a $60 DLC, this is Modern Warfare 2.21 at best, and a crapload more DLCS making this rehashed game worth more than $100 of instant garbage so they can sell millions of copies to console fanboys, this game wasn't developed for PC players. Just another year of stale gameplay with slightly new features and changes, but all still the same, and PVP for PC players is garbage, sure, they have private servers, but you can only rank in PVP matches which are no fun half the time because player host issues. Oh, I would have gave this a 1 rating, but I always enjoyed the single player story campaign of the series, the story felt like I was playing in a Michael Bay movie, EXPLOSIONS, BOOM! MORE EXPLOSIONS! AWESOME! so I gave it 2.… Expand
  19. Andrew_Paterson
    Mar 2, 2012
    2
    COD 4: MW I really enjoyed. MW2 was alright but given that I basically can't remember it can't have been that great. With that said I did get a strange sense of deja-vu playing MW3... If Activision can't be bothered to come up with reasonable plot I can't be bothered to finish writing this... Utterly whatever.
  20. 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
  21. ElHard
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    The same, same...The first year is fantastic, the second good, the thirth aceptable... but next games, identicals... no, thank you. Activision must change or rest for a years and come back with fresh air.
  22. TheNameLess0ne
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    This game could only come with recommendation if you own no COD games after COD 4 it is literally a $60 map pack. The graphics are actually even worse than previous COD's and there have been zero gameplay changes whatsoever. The campaign is so bad that it's not worth playing. So really the only reason to pick this up would be if you don't own another COD game, in which case I'd recommendThis game could only come with recommendation if you own no COD games after COD 4 it is literally a $60 map pack. The graphics are actually even worse than previous COD's and there have been zero gameplay changes whatsoever. The campaign is so bad that it's not worth playing. So really the only reason to pick this up would be if you don't own another COD game, in which case I'd recommend you get another COD over this...… Expand
  23. Mzungu
    Feb 17, 2012
    2
    Finally played MW3 after it being out for a little over 3 months. This is the first game I have ever deleted from my computer. After playing multiplayer for around 6 hours I had to quit playing. The community is exactly what the comics make it out to be... Everyone I met was drunk, stoned, or prepubescent. The game has not evolved since MW 1. Its ok to use a cookie cutter recipe for a godFinally played MW3 after it being out for a little over 3 months. This is the first game I have ever deleted from my computer. After playing multiplayer for around 6 hours I had to quit playing. The community is exactly what the comics make it out to be... Everyone I met was drunk, stoned, or prepubescent. The game has not evolved since MW 1. Its ok to use a cookie cutter recipe for a god game but using the same engine for graphics 4 years in a row... I just find that lazy. If you own any of the other games don't bother with this one multiplayer is exactly the same. O I guess there was a campaign that came with the multiplayer... 1 more thing i forgot to mention. Bugs. Idk if it was just me but there were 2 cases in mp where I had a bugged spawn point and could not move. This happens 3 + months after the game has been released. Stick with MW 1 or 2… Expand
  24. drowsy77
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    It's a DLC for MW2, what else can I say. It's fun, dont get me wrong, but come on...
    I am going to return it and get some other game. Not worth my money, it's really insulting.
  25. Crazycanuck
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Mw3 strength is it gave everyone exactly what they were looking for...

    Mw3's biggest weakness..is the fact it gave everyone exactly the same game as last time. Same weapons, same voice overs, same almost everything. The only thing new in MW3 was the SP campaign. The mw3 Multi-player game looks like Mw2 with a few new maps and things strewn about. This MP game could have sold as a map    Mw3 strength is it gave everyone exactly what they were looking for...

    Mw3's biggest weakness..is the fact it gave everyone exactly the same game as last time. Same weapons, same voice overs, same almost everything. The only thing new in MW3 was the SP campaign. The mw3 Multi-player game looks like Mw2 with a few new maps and things strewn about. This MP game could have sold as a map pack for mw2 and got away with it. then again..maybe COD players just bought a really expensive map-pack with a new sp attached to it.    … Expand
  26. Nomus
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    YOu know people say that sequel is worse than the original but MW3 is different. It exactly the same. Nothing has changed at all. Absolutely. They just made bunch of new maps for a multiplayer, wrote **** scenario(and if MW2 scenario was good MW3 scenario is much worse. Even worse than Black Ops) and released it as a new game. Graphics is absolutely the same. NOTHING HAS CHANGEDYOu know people say that sequel is worse than the original but MW3 is different. It exactly the same. Nothing has changed at all. Absolutely. They just made bunch of new maps for a multiplayer, wrote **** scenario(and if MW2 scenario was good MW3 scenario is much worse. Even worse than Black Ops) and released it as a new game. Graphics is absolutely the same. NOTHING HAS CHANGED ABSOLUTLEY. Ofcourse Activision had paid a lot of money to get high scores in the reviews but MW3 doesn't deserve 9.0 it deserves 7.0 at best and as a simple map pack it doesn't worth 50$. Don't spend your money on it unless you are one of these blind CoD fans. + bugs lags and freezes @ PC version that holds any other moder FPS at 60 fps. What the **** MW3?… Expand
  27. theimmortalmoo
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    It's COD...it's the Madden of FPS games. Meh, the SP was nice, but didn't like the change in voice actors for Captain price, at least he sounded different, I believe Bill Murray (no not the guy from ghost busters) did the original voice. But honestly what do you expect with he Head of the ORIGINAL Infinity ward is no longer working on the product. (Thanks activision....)
  28. CorruptPersona
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    There's not much to say about the Call of Duty series any more. They have used the same engine for years, the game itself offers nothing to the FPS industry, let alone the gaming industry apart from disappointment. MW3 seems more of a fix for the previous games and to correct the imbalance during online gameplay. If you ignore the statements above and look at the current state of the gameThere's not much to say about the Call of Duty series any more. They have used the same engine for years, the game itself offers nothing to the FPS industry, let alone the gaming industry apart from disappointment. MW3 seems more of a fix for the previous games and to correct the imbalance during online gameplay. If you ignore the statements above and look at the current state of the game it seems they have been aiming more towards the casual audience with more perks for ease of play that will drive some hardcore players over the edge and seeking other FPS games.… Expand
  29. johnnnn3335
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    COD:MW3 is pretty much the same game as MW2, and quite similar to MW1. The graphics are similar to MW2, the gameplay is essentially unchanged, and there's nothing else to speak of that is different. That doesn't mean the game is unplayable. To the contrary, its a smooth FPS, but entirely mechanistic: you might as well be shooting pop-up targets in between cutscenes.

    The graphics are    COD:MW3 is pretty much the same game as MW2, and quite similar to MW1. The graphics are similar to MW2, the gameplay is essentially unchanged, and there's nothing else to speak of that is different. That doesn't mean the game is unplayable. To the contrary, its a smooth FPS, but entirely mechanistic: you might as well be shooting pop-up targets in between cutscenes.

    The graphics are pretty bad. I don't know why its so hard to simply produce high quality textures and graphic components and then downscale for the obsolete consoles, but it seems that this game takes the opposite approach: which is why a graphics card that you could buy for $50 four years ago (the Nvidia 8600) is still the required card. Despite what the "recommended" stats might suggest, there's no more eye candy for those with a better system- just higher framerates for those who see 60 frames per second and up. This wouldn't be such an issue if the gameplay or story was involving, but its not.

    Overall, a mediocre if competent clone.    … Expand
  30. IAmBedlam
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    Just another cash in of a tired old franchise. Re-releasing a video game every year and making millions is just a slap in the face to real developers who actually take the time to make a decent video game, with a good engine, great online, and a good story.
  31. xEnAlex
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    For a Call of Duty 1, United Offensive, Finest Hour, 2, 3, 4 and WaW fan, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3, you got to call it some slack, even though it's the same, it's kind of fun with the diverse perks. There were MAJOR problems with the game when I saw it thought. Same as before, Modern Warfare 3 failed to provide a deep impact into my gaming career, and such, I decided to throw is asideFor a Call of Duty 1, United Offensive, Finest Hour, 2, 3, 4 and WaW fan, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3, you got to call it some slack, even though it's the same, it's kind of fun with the diverse perks. There were MAJOR problems with the game when I saw it thought. Same as before, Modern Warfare 3 failed to provide a deep impact into my gaming career, and such, I decided to throw is aside like Black Ops (Should be called Deniable Operations), and Modern Warfare 2.

    Singleplayer: They pulled a McDeath, literally. The storyline did not have much connection with MW2, and the style were REALLY repetitive. I defiantly HATE the direction call of duty's storyline is headed. They need to start putting characters that feel like part of a brotherhood, like Call of Duty 1 (All expansions, ESPECIALLY Finest Hour), 2 and 3. The storyline was way too easy, it had to be like Finest Hour difficulty to provide a emotional relief and happiness to realize you accomplished something. The thing that punched me was the flow of carelessness that went into the story, it was like something hastily made, chewed up, and regurgitated. They need to bring back WORLD WAR 2, not WORLD WAR 3. Bring back reality, the emotional stories of Stalinglad, or make a story in WORLD WAR 1, heck, forget World War 3, it did not happen, it breaks the traditional sense, and it DESTROYS the purpose of storyline in combat, for honor and glory, not for revenge. The second part is that it was mostly run and gun, no stealth, no support, no battle in front lines as a normal soldier, just a super soldier who runs and guns everything.

    Multiplayer: Downright copy from Modern Warfare 2 with guns that seemed to be just skinned with different sound clips. Don't get me wrong fanboys, I like they actually did something. They added New perks, gameplay styles, and guns. Still, they have same graphics(Really don't care), same achievement easy-go-lucky style I hate, and mostly, unbalanced gameplay. One person gets lucky, everyone else in enemy team is screwed. The achievement system, it felt like too easy, like they were spoonfeeding you, unlike Call of Duty 1, where you work as a team, and once you destroy that freaking Panzer Tank, your teammates felt almost like warriors of god, destroying everything in your wake.

    Improvements: Next time, go to World War I and II, go to the past PLEASE.
    Make a new system that is improvement to Call of Duty 1 or 2.
    And finally, make balanced kill streaks that strategize yet keep with the fast-paced action.
    Singleplayer? MAKE IT REALISTIC, like a soldier in the front lines fighting with comrades... like STALINGRAD COMRADES!

    CHARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGEEEEEEEE!    … Expand
  32. Nomadski
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    The glory days of Cod 2 seem so long ago. Why FourZeroTwo and his cronies insist on giving pc gamers less than IW gave 5 years ago is beyond me. SP campaign is as linear as BF3's except misses out on the great tank levels, is just one interactive cut scene followed by a corridor, then a shooting gallery then repeat till end of level. Its DULL. The AI is beyond retarded, even worse thanThe glory days of Cod 2 seem so long ago. Why FourZeroTwo and his cronies insist on giving pc gamers less than IW gave 5 years ago is beyond me. SP campaign is as linear as BF3's except misses out on the great tank levels, is just one interactive cut scene followed by a corridor, then a shooting gallery then repeat till end of level. Its DULL. The AI is beyond retarded, even worse than Crysis. I dont know how a company can screw up a franshice as great as the first 2 Cods were but IW managed it with aplomb, at least MW1 had a great SP, this game has nothing, except a cut n paste building from MW1 (the African level).

    Utterly dreadful. Maybe the mp can give it a little pickup, but if its anything like the perk / killstreak driven nonsense previous MW's have been, I very much doubt it.

    A dire, dull, drab, console orientated shooter with less complexity than 1993's Doom.

    Hell, even their website forum sucks ass.

    Door    … Expand
  33. regimechange
    Nov 8, 2011
    2
    I've always thought that every game has something new to offer. I was mistaken. I never thought a game could possibly not bring anything new to the table. Seriously, this is the exact same game as Modern Warfare 2, and the first Modern Warfare. I would consider it DLC. The audio is the same, the graphics are the same, the gameplay is the same. There is literally no innovation in this game.I've always thought that every game has something new to offer. I was mistaken. I never thought a game could possibly not bring anything new to the table. Seriously, this is the exact same game as Modern Warfare 2, and the first Modern Warfare. I would consider it DLC. The audio is the same, the graphics are the same, the gameplay is the same. There is literally no innovation in this game. The worst part is, a lot of critics are saying that this may be a good thing. I'm starting to think these critics are paid off by big gaming companies... If there were no innovation in video games, we may as well be playing pong still.

    Each part of a game is unique though, there are graphics, gameplay, storyline, multiplayer, and an underlying feel to the game that is created by how much work a developer put into it, and how the engine runs.

    The graphics in Modern Warfare 3 are astounding.... For a game based on an engine written at around 2005. Nothing new here. The graphics are about the same as CoD4, from 2007. Infinity Ward needs to write a new engine already. Compared to the brand new Frostbite 2 engine, the iw5 is just way too outdated to be useful anymore. The textures are blurry and the scenery looks flat. It's just not good looking enough to be considered modern looking in 2011. Plus, to be quite frank, the audio sucks. All the guns sound like paintball guns and the reload sounds sound pretty crappy. This is even on my 100$ turtle beach headset. It was also lazily done, as a lot of the sounds seemed like they were from previous CoD games.

    The gameplay is okay. Although, it's the same gameplay we've been getting since CoD4. Again with the innovation issue here. As I ran around with my UMP45 it felt just like Modern Warfare 2. Had I wanted to play Modern Warfare 2, I would have. There is literally nothing new.

    The storyline in this game is similar to those of Michael Bay movies, which gross millions of dollars at the box office because of hot women, big explosions, and epic battles. Modern Warfare 3 only delivers on two of these promises. The storyline is infested with plotholes, and generally it is unexciting as Infinity Ward tried to get us to care about the characters. The needless explosions are overdone too. If you try to play any singleplayer, it's like the whole level is ridden with explosions and shotguns. Overall, CoD's storyline is to gaming as Michael Bay's movies are to television. Neither offer any compelling storylines or genuinely well done scenes, and both just throw in what Amerians like to see. It's the same crap they throw at us every year.

    The multiplayer in CoD was fun. In CoD4. At this point I just see more of the same, just like with everything else in this game. The multiplayer is a rage inducing, 12 year old populated nightmare. In every CoD game, there is something that people find that ruins the whole game. For example, quickscoping and noobtubing. The one thing that CoD did get right was replay ability. Although now I think everyone's gotten tired of the franchise, and the replay ability has died.

    Although CoD has a decent underlying feel, I think that it's easy to tell that the developers did not put much work into this. Now i'm not sure if this is because Activision likes to rush one game a year, just to milk the cash cow more, or if the developers are truly lazy... But it definitely has an impact on the game. It just feels wrong. All in all this game offers nothing new, and fails to deliver on all aspects. To be honest I've seen DLC, or title updates with more new content than Modern Warfare 3. I hope the average gaming consumer brightens up, and realizes what they're buying into, so that this detriment to gaming culture will just die already. I feel like the regime of CoD as the top player is about to topple, as their games get worse and worse. It's just like the Star Wars prequels. There is no innovation. There should be no real reason for anyone to buy Modern Warfare.

    I mean 3.

    Also for credibility's sake, i've been a fan of CoD since CoD2, and enjoyed it up until WaW. I've played A LOT of games, and am pretty sure i'm not a fanboy, for I enjoy many games.    … Expand
  34. gizmo737
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    I'am completly disappointed. Why ? Because MW3 is very similar to MW2. And both these games are much worse than MW1 (2007). Now is .... 2011 so I expected something better. It is my last CoD. Sorry .... Waste of money.
  35. TheGregsterx
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    Modern Warfare 3 Impressions.

    I recently purchased the new game from the call of duty franchise in high hopes that the latest instalment will be everything I enjoyed greatly about the 1st, and 2nd modern warfare game. The 1st modern warfare game was amazing, which created the success for the 2nd modern warfare game. The 3rd one is based around the setup of the 2nd modern warfare. This    Modern Warfare 3 Impressions.

    I recently purchased the new game from the call of duty franchise in high hopes that the latest instalment will be everything I enjoyed greatly about the 1st, and 2nd modern warfare game. The 1st modern warfare game was amazing, which created the success for the 2nd modern warfare game. The 3rd one is based around the setup of the 2nd modern warfare. This leads me to the things I dislike in comparison to modern warfare 2.

    Bullet Damage: Modern warfare 2 had very high bullet damage and was consistent for all ranges in the maps 3-4 hits was standard, careful shooting allowed you to kill from a decent distance of 100m + with almost any gun. Modern warfare 3 how ever does not allow for correct range correlation. When I'm firing at targets 10-20-30 metres away from me which is nothing in the real world, with a sub machine gun it is taking 4-8 bullets just to kill someone. This unrealistic frustrating over dramatic affect of bullet range in submachine guns makes them unusable in standard combat and puts them at a great disadvantage to assault rifles.

    Sprinting: Modern warfare 2 had a decent time for sprinting of lets say around 10 seconds (I'm not sure of the exact sprinting times) which was a good amount if you weren't focused on rushing as a main goal, and if you were focused on rushing you had a perfect perk for that sort of game play marathon gave unlimited sprint which was dire for map coverage and aggressive game play. In modern warfare 3 no such perk is available yes extreme conditioning slightly helps the problem but it only increases the initial sprinting time, nothing to do with sprinting recovery so when you get to a certain point it becomes a useless perk. Not giving decent sprinting perks, just decreases the potential of sub machine guns further because doesn't allow proper potential to get into close quarters. Explosives: Okay I will admit modern warfare 2 was quite generous with the explosions and explosive damage but many of them were completely balanced, the grenades had good throwing distance and 100% reasonable damage, you could avoid them if you played carefully. I agree that grenade launcher attachment was quite overpowered and well placed grenades could kill 5-6 people at the start of the game but how often did that really happen? RPG's were rarely used because you had to be the max level to use them and the thumper did decent damage but had little area affect which balanced it perfectly. I agree that the danger close perk did cause imbalances in using most of the explosives, but it gave up the most important perk slot, yes high power explosions were frustrating at times but you never did as much damage as proper run and gunning. Modern warfare 3 has disgustingly pitiful explosion damage, when I throw a semtex in about 10 metres it goes straight to the ground no matter how high I throw it and it never kills ever unless you stand right on top of it, it's damage is a complete joke the only kills I literally have gotten on the semtex were people on incredibly low health and stick kills. Grenade launchers only kill right on there feet or direct hits, secondary rocket launchers are unusable because they are completely underpowered and trying to aim directly at a person to get a kill defeats the purpose of a rocket launcher.



    Title and emblem unlocks: One of my personal favourite things about modern warfare 2 the title and emblem unlocks and the customisations of your "profile" you went through specific challenges some varying in difficulty and you would receive experience, an emblem and/or title. For example kill 1000 people with the stopping power perk, you would receive a title "bite the bullet" and a emblem which has a picture of the stopping power pro icon. This was a nice way to reward the user for continued use of a specific perk and could boast/show these to other players who look at your profile. Modern warfare 3 how ever has displayed no such difficulty in unlocking the emblems or titles for example, I started using the perk assassin and within a couple of minutes I have unlocked the pro version of the perk, and the emblem which displays the perk icon. This is a disgustingly quick form of unlocking something which in modern warfare took hundreds of games to unlock. This causes no form of pride or boast to your profile as in most titles are unlocked in minutes.

    The matchmaking and g    … Expand
  36. Crysie
    Feb 13, 2012
    2
    Could not say much more then what have alrdy been said, Grafic feel old so as the game. All the positives seems to think that all Negatives are "Fanboys" I would say around 20% is fanboys maby. and lets say 5%of them have played the game.. if they liked it.. they would not give it a bad rewive right?and i would say that 20% of the posetives are "Fanboys" also so it evens up. The criticsCould not say much more then what have alrdy been said, Grafic feel old so as the game. All the positives seems to think that all Negatives are "Fanboys" I would say around 20% is fanboys maby. and lets say 5%of them have played the game.. if they liked it.. they would not give it a bad rewive right?and i would say that 20% of the posetives are "Fanboys" also so it evens up. The critics are the same rubbish also.. giving MW3 higher graphic then BF3. that dosnt make any seens? But if they want the same grafic and the same game over and over again.. yeah.,. give them 10s and let the keep dropping the same game for 5 years more.. or give then Negatives if u like them to make a new enegine or something. But i know im giving this a 2 cuz im tierd of this now. if they would have droped this right after mw2 , they could have goten a 7.. Call me fanboy or whatever u all want... but that gives this game a 10 and QQ about Fanboys here... thats a real fanboys. Sry my english tho. but hope my point got past here… Expand
  37. 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
  38. 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
  39. shai182
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    this is sad for me the game came as a hope for something that is not there, Dedicated servers are unranked, the MP is the same as MW2 in truth this fell like an update to MW2 but it see to be worse then MW2, I'm just so freaking frustrated why the F*** i payed for this?????
    I wanted an improved MP for PC no another bad port from a console!!! I want ranked Dedicated servers and i want a    this is sad for me the game came as a hope for something that is not there, Dedicated servers are unranked, the MP is the same as MW2 in truth this fell like an update to MW2 but it see to be worse then MW2, I'm just so freaking frustrated why the F*** i payed for this?????
    I wanted an improved MP for PC no another bad port from a console!!! I want ranked Dedicated servers and i want a lot more then i got offered here.    … Expand
  40. zakhar
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    It's just an over-hyped update for an old game, not a new game you would expect. It looks and feels more or less the same as CoD: Black Ops, and is more an arcade point-and-shoot game rather than a tactical shooter. It is a very entertaining game, though... for the first half an hour.
  41. ShiftNMove
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    I really wish I could give this game a good review, but I cant. Im really sick of having to buy the same game over and over. Sure this game is slightly fresh but i feel like im playing the same game. If you've been playing COD for a long time it's really the same game with a different name. If you've never played COD before and you like FPS games then you will probably enjoy this game.I really wish I could give this game a good review, but I cant. Im really sick of having to buy the same game over and over. Sure this game is slightly fresh but i feel like im playing the same game. If you've been playing COD for a long time it's really the same game with a different name. If you've never played COD before and you like FPS games then you will probably enjoy this game. Otherwise this game is really just another way for the franchise to squeeze more and more money out of consumers. Not sure why I bought this game. It was probably because I have always been a fan of COD, but this is really too much. I think there might be ulterior motives for the distributors due to the amount of re-masking and re-releasing the same game. I feel bad for the developers who have probably been impeded from improving the engine because the distributors realized that making a new name with the same engine without improvements is a major cash cow. Anyways, I hate to sound like another one of these BF3 guys but I have been extremely surprised and amazed with BF3. I've never been a fan of BF series but even release day of MW3 i stopped to play BF3 and didnt even realize how much fun I was having without COD. I would recommend to anyone to check both games out and make your own decision, but it should be pretty clear which game you should really get if you do the research and test both out properly. Thank you DICE for such a great game, you have turned one more COD player into a BF player! Activison... shame on you for ruining COD. You greedy jerks prevent developers like Infinity Ward from making substantial changes worth my $59.99.… Expand
  42. discodisco
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    I must say... I expected a lot more when I purchased this game... $66 down the drain... With some graphical improvements and a few ported structures here and there... It's been one foggy memory after another resurfacing in my head. Would have been a great DLC for $10 in my opinion.
  43. T4GARRETT
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    A waste of my Alienware rig. Same old B.S Activision have just bundled MW2 in a different box and cut the campaign down even more. A complete P.O.S Even veteran is a walk in the park as though they have watered down the experience for the casual market. I would rather play DNF at least it is challenging
  44. memzer
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    DO NOT BUY THIS IF YOU PLAY FROM AUSTRALIA.

    I was really looking forward to this game considering the great game that CoD:BO was. Unfortunately Modern Warfare 3 just has not lived up to the hype. The single player campaign was pretty good but like most I bought it for multiplayer and multiplayer in MW3 is simply atrocious. Unlike CoD:BO they have decided that they will not allow ranked    DO NOT BUY THIS IF YOU PLAY FROM AUSTRALIA.

    I was really looking forward to this game considering the great game that CoD:BO was. Unfortunately Modern Warfare 3 just has not lived up to the hype. The single player campaign was pretty good but like most I bought it for multiplayer and multiplayer in MW3 is simply atrocious. Unlike CoD:BO they have decided that they will not allow ranked play on dedicated servers. For those unfamiliar with the game this means that you are restricted to playing one of five classes (with skills, perks and weapons preselected for you). You cannot level any custom classes, work towards prestige, or do any of the fun things assoicated with ranked play. I know you're thinking, so just play on ranked servers... right?

    Introduce the BANE of the multiplayer experience - the Match Making Service. One word. LAG. Again. LAG!... LAAAAAAAAG! In two nights of game play probably 80-90% of games have been dominated by players complaining about the latency. What's the problem? With no dedicated servers one player is selected to host the game and with it come a host of problems indeed. The selection process begins by finding low latency groups for you to play with, if it fails to find one it tries a higher latency group, and so on, and so on until you're matched. For people in Australia (and I gather other regions without the US playerbase) this means you're automatically grouped with international servers) - there is no option to wait to be grouped with local players. Even if you are grouped with local players often the player selected simply doesn't have the capability required to be a stable host. This results in games where people simply teleport around, where clients are out of sync (stand behind a person, shoot, only to watch them being behind you knifing you in the replay) and with constant host migrations (where the game gives up on the host and tries to pick a different host - which often fails as well).

    The other problem may just have to do with the player pool. If you don't like playing ranked TDM or TDM-Tags, good luck to you. There are just no local games for the other game types. In three days I have not managed to find a single local game of CTF. It's horrible.

    So why did they avoid dedicated servers? To prevent cheating the developers say. Here we are *two days* later and the Modern Warfare 2 Aimbot/wall cheats have been modified to work with Modern Warfare 3 only now there is no way to track or ban the cheating players.

    Giving the game a 2/10 for the single player campaign only. I cannot stress enough, if you are in Australia save your $99 and buy a different game.    … Expand
  45. 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
  46. naveenk
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    $60 for the same game for four years... The same style of Gameplay... The campaign is cliched and has now become boring... The multiplayer is too predictable... Once u have gotten familiar with the map its boring... For eg u can actually guess that some guy will come out of the pathway on the next turn.. or u can guess there is atleast 1 sniper on a particular spot.. what i am saying is$60 for the same game for four years... The same style of Gameplay... The campaign is cliched and has now become boring... The multiplayer is too predictable... Once u have gotten familiar with the map its boring... For eg u can actually guess that some guy will come out of the pathway on the next turn.. or u can guess there is atleast 1 sniper on a particular spot.. what i am saying is the maps are too small and few... Not like BF3 where everything is huge and destructible where no two matches are exactly the same and u can never predict where the enemy is.. even though BF3's campaign is bad, the multiplayer alone blows COD MW3 or any COD for that matter, out of the water..
    The appeal of COD has gone since COD MW2 and nowadays ppl buy coz their friend bought it... Dont waste ur hard earned money and join the bandwagon    … Expand
  47. bejayel
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    It''s not that you can't have fun with this game, you can. The problem is that I already had fun with it for the last 5 years. The new class layout system and explosive damage reductions are welcome changes, but it's too little too late.

    Much of what was included in this title should have been fixed in MW2 in the first place, but IW saw fit to ignore supporting their fans and let MW2 turn    It''s not that you can't have fun with this game, you can. The problem is that I already had fun with it for the last 5 years. The new class layout system and explosive damage reductions are welcome changes, but it's too little too late.

    Much of what was included in this title should have been fixed in MW2 in the first place, but IW saw fit to ignore supporting their fans and let MW2 turn into a cesspool. MW3 balances a lot of things, though power weapons remain where being competitive relies on running the same set up as everyone else, leaving little variety in multiplayer game play unless you want to die a lot.

    The cheating community appears to be as strong as ever. Having run in to an entire party of blatant cheaters in my first 2 lobbies. Along with that, there also appears to be a host hack already, allowing the user to force himself as host despite clearly not being the best pick. This is why the PC doesn't get any access to Elite, but it's not something that going to change anyway. If anything, they should give the PC players access to elite so it's easier to find and eliminate these players from the community.

    That's not to say MW3 doesn't have any saving graces. The maps are much more well designed than previous titles. The unlock system is fine. The new classes where I can be more help without being a try hard are all welcome changes and are for the better. Unfortunately, it's not enough.

    There's no innovation. Everything here has been seen before, often done much better. The sound in the game is absolute garbage compared to recent battlefield games. The engine is really showing its age graphically. If this was Modern Warfare 1, I would have said they struck the nail on the head. Unfortunately for IW and Activision, this title has simply confirmed that I will not be paying for the next CoD title set to be released November next year.    … Expand
  48. hagenius
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    worst cod so far, do i have to tell you more?
    -locked fov for pc
    -small maps that sucks
    -graphics
    -nearly nothing new at all
    -models from cod 4

    not much to say about this peice of junk, if u want to pay 60 bucks for a bad copy of mw2 go ahead
  49. BigBubbaB
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    This game is nothing more than a small upgrade of the previous version. Lots have been reskinned and there is a decent single player story and a few new game modes for multiplayer.
    That would be fine if this was a 20$ish expansion, but you pay 59.99$ for this.
    So if you don
  50. Epidemic12
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Generic cash cow for Activision coming out yearly now. I remember when Call of Duty took more than 9 months for a "new" game. Really the game mechanics haven't changed since CoD4. Every year it is like a DLC pack that becomes the next game except this DLC costs $50 every time.
  51. CaveatEmptor5
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    CoD is apparently the best series the West has to offer. What they're offering, of course, is the same exact thing they have delivered every year for the past couple of years - Hollywood style action movie game for people with ADD: Electric Boogaloo. At least they don't seem to make the pretense of this kind of thing being exclusively for "Hardcore gamers" because like Nintendo, the salesCoD is apparently the best series the West has to offer. What they're offering, of course, is the same exact thing they have delivered every year for the past couple of years - Hollywood style action movie game for people with ADD: Electric Boogaloo. At least they don't seem to make the pretense of this kind of thing being exclusively for "Hardcore gamers" because like Nintendo, the sales mostly come from the exact opposite kind of person. Which is worse, Western devs dominating consoles or the entire FPS genre as a whole, I can't even say. The biggest fear is that THIS GAME could very well be a child's first videogame. And that is extremely depressing.… Expand
  52. MrMan13
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    After playing MW3 for a bit, i realized it's just a $60 map pack for the last game. not happy not happy at all! I suppose I shouldn't have expected much coming from someone who "didn't balance for lean" but really not to happy throwing money away. Also full well knowing they will probably release another 10 + map packs at $15 .
  53. 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
  54. 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.
  55. 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*
  56. stg213
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    You take cover behind a crate or a wall and shoot the first wave... then the second wave... and you can continue to do this until you run out of ammo as the enemies will keep on spawning forever unless you move a crate forward. Then they move a crate back. (wow... what a challenge!) The AI is horrendeous! Enemies will take "cover" 2 metres in front of you, in plain sight just waiting to beYou take cover behind a crate or a wall and shoot the first wave... then the second wave... and you can continue to do this until you run out of ammo as the enemies will keep on spawning forever unless you move a crate forward. Then they move a crate back. (wow... what a challenge!) The AI is horrendeous! Enemies will take "cover" 2 metres in front of you, in plain sight just waiting to be shot. If you crouch, suddenly enemies can't aim anymore always shooting over your head. I didn't manage to die even once in the first hour of gameplay (then I just gave up on it).

    The environments are painted pretty but there are close to zero physics effects. Except from bullets painting decals there's no way to damage anything (not that I noticed). Even slamming a guided missile ontop of a building leaves the roof intact. "Modern" Warfare my ass...

    Your squad mate's aiming is horrendeous... you can literally stare at the same machine gunner for minutes at a time and he won't even get a scrach "subtely" inviting you to take the shot. If however you move to "the next crate" their aim suddenly improves and the guy is taken out in seconds. And I remember reading on IGN that the "scripting" had gotten better in MW3... where?!?

    I don't think it's fair to rate this game 0 because it has some merits... about the same merits as playing a shooter on rails on Android... but it's not THAT bad to deserve 0 points. This is a shameful attempt at a game... from a gameplay standpoint it doesn't even stand up to a 1994 Shooter. The Gfx are ok-ish, some nice lighting but particle effects are complete crap. The sound is also poor, the gun in your hand doesn't feel real, neither as recoil neither as sound. The bullet whizzing by your head effect has no connection to what actually goes on on screen, it's just like a "static warfare soundtrack".

    I'm not amazed that a **** game like this gets made in 2011, i'm amazed at the scores it gets from "gaming sites" (81 aggregate score ??? cmmoon) and amazed at how little gamers respect themselves theese days, being willing to spend money on this kind of crap. Do yourself a favor and pirate the game... then if you truly think it's a good game, buy it!    … Expand
  57. ThaWiz77
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    I've been a loyal fan of Call of Duty for more than 10 years. I've played every game in the series and must simply conclude the following about MW3: The biggest disappointment ever in terms of Call of Duty! I enjoyed the singleplayer somewhat (hence I score the game a 2, not a 1), but the multiplayer is simply devastatingly poor on PC. Graphics look at least 5 - 6 years old. Servers areI've been a loyal fan of Call of Duty for more than 10 years. I've played every game in the series and must simply conclude the following about MW3: The biggest disappointment ever in terms of Call of Duty! I enjoyed the singleplayer somewhat (hence I score the game a 2, not a 1), but the multiplayer is simply devastatingly poor on PC. Graphics look at least 5 - 6 years old. Servers are sluggish. Scaled down Elite feature on PC. The multiplayer plays practically identically to MW2 and BlackOps. Why fix something that is not broken you say? Well, somehow I expected more. Much more. Buy Battlefield 3.… Expand
  58. kei974
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    Que de deception ! aucun renouveau si ce n'est quelques carte en plus ! de la poudre au yeux ! on à l'impression que les developpeur se sont endormis sur un succes qui est perte de qualité ! payer autant pour cela c'est prendre le joueur pour une vache a lait ! c simple MW c fini pour moi !
  59. 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
  60. GHOST21
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    Cod is the best, i loved this game category,the graphic little bit disappointed, but the game play is so enjoyable,the story is still made in good mode... activation keep it up!!!
  61. tillerlw
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    More of the same. Got a 2 because the SP campaign story is "ok". MP is the same as the previous installments. Wait and pick this one up in the bargain bin at Game Trader. Should be plenty. Not worth $60 by far.
  62. aza113
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    This is a joke of a game, I mean...1st of all , what is up with SFX? is this supposed to be gunshots or a chopping board? and the story, if the story is no longer engaging I dare say CoD is dead, I mean BF# isn't perfect, but i did get excited when Dima and Co jumps out of the plane, that was awesome...failed to get an awesome moment in this campaign, partly due to the lack of visual andThis is a joke of a game, I mean...1st of all , what is up with SFX? is this supposed to be gunshots or a chopping board? and the story, if the story is no longer engaging I dare say CoD is dead, I mean BF# isn't perfect, but i did get excited when Dima and Co jumps out of the plane, that was awesome...failed to get an awesome moment in this campaign, partly due to the lack of visual and audio quality iguess,. this game is a shame to the great that was Modern Warefare 1 and the original infinity ward… Expand
  63. spartanglory
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    This is embarrassing. What a great franchise flushed down the toilet. No dedicated servers on PC is inexcusable. Graphics are beyond bad relative to price and the fact that this is 2011. WOW. So sad to see this. I love this franchise but I feel abused by the developers. ABUSED. never again.
  64. r3pLaY
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    I have played all CoD games since day one as well as the BF series, But i got to say this is just a cash grab. After 6+ hours of playing this game is nothing more then MW2 with a new coat of paint, Graphics look out dated and bad, Sound is horrible and the maps are just old rehashed MW1,2 maps. Also to charge $50 ( A YEAR LOL ) for CoD:elite is sooooo ridiculas when EA offers it for forI have played all CoD games since day one as well as the BF series, But i got to say this is just a cash grab. After 6+ hours of playing this game is nothing more then MW2 with a new coat of paint, Graphics look out dated and bad, Sound is horrible and the maps are just old rehashed MW1,2 maps. Also to charge $50 ( A YEAR LOL ) for CoD:elite is sooooo ridiculas when EA offers it for for free with BF3. All in all this is my last CoD until they stop trying to package the same crap over and over again… Expand
  65. Columbo
    Nov 13, 2011
    2
    Man picked this game up and played it for a few hours at a lan cafe on launch night, mostly multiplayer. I have to say, if anyone were to pick this game up for the first time, theyd love the hell out of this. But it's the same game I played in 2007 and 2009 again and I was unpeasantly surprised to see that very little changed. The only attraction for DOC veterans like me is the campaignMan picked this game up and played it for a few hours at a lan cafe on launch night, mostly multiplayer. I have to say, if anyone were to pick this game up for the first time, theyd love the hell out of this. But it's the same game I played in 2007 and 2009 again and I was unpeasantly surprised to see that very little changed. The only attraction for DOC veterans like me is the campaign which I assume will only last for a few hours or so. So to all the fanboys out there (including the critics) who are biased to this game, I ask this, why do you like this processed **** so much? And to all the haters.....WHAT THE **** DID YOU EXPECT???… Expand
  66. Cockhound69
    Nov 13, 2011
    2
    This game will get a point for everything they did that WASN'T a copy/paste of MW2 So, here is the list:
    1. Spec Ops survival: Yes, its a rehash of zombies, but its kinda cool, actually.
    2. The new kill streaks/weapon proficiency things: Not major enough for one each, but they deserve a mention. 3. Splitscreen multiplayer: yes it was in black ops, but its new to modern warfare, so it    This game will get a point for everything they did that WASN'T a copy/paste of MW2 So, here is the list:
    1. Spec Ops survival: Yes, its a rehash of zombies, but its kinda cool, actually.
    2. The new kill streaks/weapon proficiency things: Not major enough for one each, but they deserve a mention.
    3. Splitscreen multiplayer: yes it was in black ops, but its new to modern warfare, so it counts.
    4. They fixed a lot of the problems I had with the game (its what MW2 SHOULD and COULD have been)

    Now, I'm going to subtract a point for everything that sucks a big one:

    1. The campaign: Not like it wasn't expected, but its still a pile of ****
    2. The graphics: I mean, come on, you knew this would happen Activision, its been 4 years, grow a pair and make a new engine.    … Expand
  67. 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
  68. OutlawNinja
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    Well after almost a week of playing this game, I am not impressed.
    IWnet is a matchmaking system to benefit who??? Does it match low ranks with other low ranks ... NO!
    IW promised us that they had listened to the PC community, listened to what we had cried out for. Dedicated servers was that cry so!!! So what do we get Unranked dedicated servers and we have to rank up on IWnet with all the    Well after almost a week of playing this game, I am not impressed.
    IWnet is a matchmaking system to benefit who??? Does it match low ranks with other low ranks ... NO!
    IW promised us that they had listened to the PC community, listened to what we had cried out for.
    Dedicated servers was that cry so!!!
    So what do we get Unranked dedicated servers and we have to rank up on IWnet with all the hackers and a ping that at best holds for one round maybe two.
    The game has so much promise and that is where the positive ends ... shot down in flames by lack of servers.
    Rehashed copy of MW2 with the usual ill treatment of PC gamers.    … Expand
  69. 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
  70. 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
  71. RUBBERPANTS
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    This game is just a repacked retweaked version of modern warfare 2 it feels like I am playing the exact same game. Infinity ward made absolutely no innovations to the COD series, and I bet that they won't next year when another calladooky comes out, it has so much hype and it so much suck's.save your money for battlefield 3 now that's a real first person shooter game.
  72. kevpwns
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    ok, seriously activision... I personally USED to like the CoD series, but now it became utter crap. I don't get why it made millions and millions, but i mean, like everyone says... Its a map pack. Everything is the same... engine, graphics, with athe addition of some killstreaks. Then, i can't even get to the worse part. They make no effort to stop hacking... The game is releashed BOOMok, seriously activision... I personally USED to like the CoD series, but now it became utter crap. I don't get why it made millions and millions, but i mean, like everyone says... Its a map pack. Everything is the same... engine, graphics, with athe addition of some killstreaks. Then, i can't even get to the worse part. They make no effort to stop hacking... The game is releashed BOOM tons of hackers.... every game. No one attempts to fix the bugs, lag... anything on the pc version. I don't even know why i'm giving this game a 2, i think it's just sad how activision is pleading for everyone to raise the score that's currently sitting at 1.9. Everything is boring, the multiplayer, singleplayer, broken game... The only reason this game actually has a score of 1 is because of thefanboys that give this game a 10/10...I wish my friend sent mw Bf3 instead...… Expand
  73. Zxenop
    Nov 16, 2011
    2
    Same game, same engine, same models, pretty some maps in solo are copy/pasta too. Not going to rant about the scenario since it always been pretty much stupid, glad however that your main character doesn't die every ten bloody seconds in cutscenes, gameplay is the same nothing surprising Multiplayer is the same, just a couple of new maps, the coop was quite nice actually
    All in all, it's    Same game, same engine, same models, pretty some maps in solo are copy/pasta too. Not going to rant about the scenario since it always been pretty much stupid, glad however that your main character doesn't die every ten bloody seconds in cutscenes, gameplay is the same nothing surprising Multiplayer is the same, just a couple of new maps, the coop was quite nice actually
    All in all, it's not a bad game but the feeling of have been scamed is here, feel like I bought a pre used game at full price    … Expand
  74. 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.
  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. milou
    Nov 21, 2011
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Hello, Please forgive me for this text which I translate by Google. Gentlemen developers Sledgehammer I would suggest a desire shared by all the players that would significantly raise the odds of MW3. Here are the improvements that would make your game more attractive, recreate your games like World At War or even better as CoD 4, the cards were beautifully madeâ… Expand
  77. havok_117
    Nov 22, 2011
    2
    The game had much hype over the last year with both sledgehammer and infinity ward/ activision promising to make sure that the game was up to and beyond expectations. The PC community was promised that dedicated servers were going to be brought back (which they were). The PC community was promised that they game would be competitive (lol) and that the new methods being implemented wouldThe game had much hype over the last year with both sledgehammer and infinity ward/ activision promising to make sure that the game was up to and beyond expectations. The PC community was promised that dedicated servers were going to be brought back (which they were). The PC community was promised that they game would be competitive (lol) and that the new methods being implemented would help deter hackers.

    I wish to convey the message that we may not have been lied to directly by any of the above mentioned companies, but we were not given full truths. Developers wished to promote Call of Duty Elite which in their opinion was something that was needed for gaming. However, PC community did not get it and recent reports claim may not ever get it (not that we asked, or were excited or even cared about the service). This service is the reason developers claim that the PC community is too unstable to create a worth while game. With inherent hacking and glitching they could not offer a valid means to roll out the service. This being as it is, developers wanted to make this their big thing for the launch and were very insistent on making this happen, even at the cost of the players. To help them make sure the game would be able to be launched on their terms (not the players) they went against what they knew to be the overwhelming majority in the PC community. They made sure dedicated servers were able to be manipulated so that hosts could unlock or lock whatever they wanted on the games. They also made it so that players could not rank up while playing on dedicated servers (everything is already unlocked). Which naturally leaves the Peer to Peer match making the only way to get the Call of Duty experience of leveling. These could be fixed if developers find away to reverse the negatives (which are major and mainly why scores are down) and do as company slogans have been across the markets "the customer is always right". While they may have beaten sell numbers from previous games I would be hard pressed to think that it will be that way (at least with PC) next time.

    To validate the +2 on my score (-8 being mentioned above) the game meets co-op expectations, although barely. While the game is fun and new many game types, the game has many glitches and problems that should have been found in beta testing (although it was not offered as an OPEN beta on PC). I have found that the game is merely something to put on the shelf (or the imaginary one of steams uninstalled games) and say "Oh yea I remember that, meh lets play something else.."    … Expand
  78. DuckHuntPro
    Dec 1, 2011
    2
    I played this game already. I played it nearly 4+ years ago when it was called Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Very little has changed since then. Sure the UI is better, the game is balanced, but couldn't they have released this as EXPANSIONS instead of asking consumers to buy it for $50 a pop?

    Its not like the graphics are that much crazier. The animations are still fluid, the    I played this game already. I played it nearly 4+ years ago when it was called Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Very little has changed since then. Sure the UI is better, the game is balanced, but couldn't they have released this as EXPANSIONS instead of asking consumers to buy it for $50 a pop?

    Its not like the graphics are that much crazier. The animations are still fluid, the hit-confirm is still great. Everything is as what it was years ago... GREAT! But after so many hours, you tend to get sick of it all. Because nothing really changed. I felt ripped off!

    Single player campaign can be completed in one night. You have mission ops that can be done solo or with a friend... which can also be complete in one night. Multiplayer has been the same since the original.

    I really think you could have released these maps as an expansion along with the story.

    My main complaint is multiplayer. The amount of hacking here is REDICULOUS. At least 1 out of 4 games I've played had 1 hacker or even 2!!! Real disappointing.... the same game for 50 bucks +    … Expand
  79. Rennn
    Jun 25, 2013
    2
    Meh...

    This was nearly identical to MW2. Literally, I think they copied some of each level layout. Not only that, but the game is an awful port. We're locked at a console FOV, with poor optimization on high-end hardware. There are no dedicated servers, cheaters and lag abounds, and if my sticky reticule pops to one more enemy automatically I think I'm going to ceremoniously burn this    Meh...

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

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

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

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

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

    It gets 2 instead of 0 because it's a functional game, and not a pile of slag that nukes your HDD.    … Expand
  80. termin_8_er
    Dec 13, 2011
    2
    Laggy and too many online cheaters with aimbots and wall-hacks; ruins the fun. Just a lot of people running around holding down the fire button, really no tactics involved. Expected a lot more, but based on the previous games and how they didn't address the cheats, its no wonder that this is no different.
  81. fury
    Dec 16, 2011
    2
    This game is an absolute disappointment. I've been playing all PC Call of Dutys since CoD1 and this game is just absolute fail.
    I especially loved to play MW2 because of much variety, almost perfectly balanced gameplay and very good maps. So were my expectations about MW3 Multiplayer...
    But in MW3 all maps feel like you move in a small box.. It's all made for running and spamming. You    This game is an absolute disappointment. I've been playing all PC Call of Dutys since CoD1 and this game is just absolute fail.
    I especially loved to play MW2 because of much variety, almost perfectly balanced gameplay and very good maps. So were my expectations about MW3 Multiplayer...
    But in MW3 all maps feel like you move in a small box.. It's all made for running and spamming.
    You are able to quickscope but maps and also the whole rest of the game clearly isn't designed for sniping at all.
    For example.. There is a perk called "Stalker" which allows the player to move with normal run-speed while aiming down the sight. There is no bobbing or increased inaccuracy. In my opinion this makes rifles and smgs really overpowered since it's a lot easier to rush other players (snipers).
    Akimbo- weapons are stronger than ever (since they have ultimate range and precision now.. )
    I think it's very good that there is no adjustable FOV since everybody has the same chance of spotting enemies now --> A fairer game where you have to be really attentive. All in all I rate it 2 because it's not as good as MW2 or MW1 at all. It's just a poorly thought-out and unbalanced spam-fest.    … Expand
  82. Fenristhewolf
    Jan 3, 2012
    2
    As somone who played and loved MW2 and some of the other MW games I have to say I was seriously disappointed in this game. It didn't feel new or better graphics or really anything that was really innovative, it just felt like an xpack to MW2 and a short one at that. I hate to rag on the game but it just didn't feel like alot went into it and the dev's just didn't try very hard on thisAs somone who played and loved MW2 and some of the other MW games I have to say I was seriously disappointed in this game. It didn't feel new or better graphics or really anything that was really innovative, it just felt like an xpack to MW2 and a short one at that. I hate to rag on the game but it just didn't feel like alot went into it and the dev's just didn't try very hard on this one. Not sure if there was a different man at the helm or what but the gameplay just felt dated.… Expand
  83. BsTe_B
    Jan 10, 2012
    2
    Played Battlefield series for years but not really a fan boy of it,, just liked the game play and the size of the maps. Well I went and purchased COD MW3 thought it would be at least near the BF experience,, not even close,,,,spec-ops and campaign were OK,, but multi-player blows chunks,, to game console-ish for me,,way too small maps. Game play is set-up for kids,,every map is a meleePlayed Battlefield series for years but not really a fan boy of it,, just liked the game play and the size of the maps. Well I went and purchased COD MW3 thought it would be at least near the BF experience,, not even close,,,,spec-ops and campaign were OK,, but multi-player blows chunks,, to game console-ish for me,,way too small maps. Game play is set-up for kids,,every map is a melee free for all, no team work happens. Video is at the most 1024x768 screen size blown up for higher res. screens. Totally made for the BOXES and not the PC and it shows. It gets a 2 rating for spec-ops and campaign but just barely.....â… Expand
  84. KCaldera
    Jan 16, 2012
    2
    Very disappointed in this game. No innovation, same past game repackaged. Same kill streak system, same type of icon style, same prestige system, same same same. Played through the FP mode on hard in less than 3 hours. Cheating is out of control. No Anti-cheat system. No real dedicated server system, so you can't play with your friends or play in modes that you like. IWnet is a bland p2pVery disappointed in this game. No innovation, same past game repackaged. Same kill streak system, same type of icon style, same prestige system, same same same. Played through the FP mode on hard in less than 3 hours. Cheating is out of control. No Anti-cheat system. No real dedicated server system, so you can't play with your friends or play in modes that you like. IWnet is a bland p2p system that tries to make everyone happy and fails. Absolutely not worth $60 or even $40.… Expand
  85. JoSantos
    Jan 21, 2012
    2
    Activition made a great mistake letting the game release AFTER battlefield 3 (a masterpiece). The game showed almost no change, They've made a few things. True, but my personal opinion is DISAPPOINTED. I really am.

    I played the whole campaign, yes, but just to finish the story, but not with the desire of enjoying the game as I did with the previews ones. It is just a shame. I just had    Activition made a great mistake letting the game release AFTER battlefield 3 (a masterpiece). The game showed almost no change, They've made a few things. True, but my personal opinion is DISAPPOINTED. I really am.

    I played the whole campaign, yes, but just to finish the story, but not with the desire of enjoying the game as I did with the previews ones. It is just a shame. I just had more expectations, I this killed all. I don't know, I feel sorry for the game as a part of our lives, because everyone loved this as much as I did and much more, much they did not put too much effort on developping this final chapter.

    I believe that this company must try a little harder next time, because I don't know if I will be buying another Call Of Duty in a future.    … Expand
  86. KvotheBloodless
    Jan 23, 2012
    2
    By far, the worst in the series. Singleplayer and spec ops are great; but spec ops gets kinda boring over long stretches even though its great. Singleplayer loses replay value after second time through or first through on Veteran. Multiplayer is complete garbage. Unbalanced, terrible level design, even MORE focused on killstreaks. Good music, good sound. Graphics are still same old sameBy far, the worst in the series. Singleplayer and spec ops are great; but spec ops gets kinda boring over long stretches even though its great. Singleplayer loses replay value after second time through or first through on Veteran. Multiplayer is complete garbage. Unbalanced, terrible level design, even MORE focused on killstreaks. Good music, good sound. Graphics are still same old same old. Gold camos are done in a stupid way; if you don't have specular maps the entire gun is chocolate brown. would've been better if they'd done it the same way as in CoD4. MW2-style red dot sight is missing, even though it was in a trailer. Horrid community. IW has forgotten that PC got them out there in the first place, and now they're giving us the finger. I'm no longer buying anything by Infinity Ward. Ever.… Expand
  87. RuneScapian
    Jan 27, 2012
    2
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.5 - Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Version 1.3) - Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare Map Pack #2: Only $59.99! - Call of Duty: Modern Douchebags - Call of Duty: Part 8 - Call of Duty: A Modern Waste of Your $60.
  88. karvala
    Feb 17, 2012
    2
    What the hell were the critics smoking when they gave this game 99%? I think 9% is nearer the mark. The best way I can summarise it is: MW1, released four year earlier, is a much better game. Graphically, this hasn't improved at all, and in terms of quality of writing, length and variety of campaign, available weapons etc., it's actually gone backwards. I presume that they're notWhat the hell were the critics smoking when they gave this game 99%? I think 9% is nearer the mark. The best way I can summarise it is: MW1, released four year earlier, is a much better game. Graphically, this hasn't improved at all, and in terms of quality of writing, length and variety of campaign, available weapons etc., it's actually gone backwards. I presume that they're not planning on releasing a MW4 given the plot, which would make sense, since after this pile of junk I suspect not many people would buy it. I certainly wouldn't. What a sad way to end what was once a great franchise.… Expand
  89. ThatGayDudeInSC
    Feb 19, 2012
    2
    Unplayable due to "Lag Compensation" that they have employed. Those that don't have the internet connection needed to play the game get "compensated" for the low speed and high ping rates. Fire multiple rounds with no hit, but killed with one bullet or while behind a solid barrier. Only reason it got a "2" is because the game ran nicely on an older video card, but the "LC" killed my desireUnplayable due to "Lag Compensation" that they have employed. Those that don't have the internet connection needed to play the game get "compensated" for the low speed and high ping rates. Fire multiple rounds with no hit, but killed with one bullet or while behind a solid barrier. Only reason it got a "2" is because the game ran nicely on an older video card, but the "LC" killed my desire for the game.… Expand
  90. YellowSnot
    Feb 19, 2012
    2
    Why release a new game if you're not going to change anything. I felt as though I was just playing MW2. The online multiplayer was particularly underwhelming, small maps, all of urban combat. So disappointed.
  91. Mafurios
    Mar 4, 2012
    2
    I heard people say this a lot: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".
    Maybe they are right I can see why people like this because it does work. (even if poorly ported for pc)
    But than I would say: "If it ain't new, don't buy it". Because it is as most people would say more of a standalone expansion than a new game and thus paying the full 60 dollar doesn't make any sense. If they sold this    I heard people say this a lot: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".
    Maybe they are right I can see why people like this because it does work. (even if poorly ported for pc)
    But than I would say: "If it ain't new, don't buy it".
    Because it is as most people would say more of a standalone expansion than a new game and thus paying the full 60 dollar doesn't make any sense.

    If they sold this for 20~ dollar and said it was a(n) (standalone) expansion I would find it acceptable.
    But they claimed it was something completely new and by doing so I assume that they don't think very highly of their customers because, they seem to think that we wouldn't notice.

    That being said I wont give this game a 0 because it isn't technically broken, but it is pretty much a ripoff with the biggest change being the 2 changing into a 3 in the title of the game.    … Expand
  92. SlickRick
    Mar 6, 2012
    2
    I loved Call of Duty up until MW2........ I will say no more.................................................................................................
  93. Ideclarewar901
    Mar 7, 2012
    2
    The companies definately get paid to give this high rating. I've been playing since the first Call of Duty ever, and i have to say, i never played Battlefield until today. Why? Because Modern Warfare 3 has been a huge let down. Too unrealistic gameplay, no matter Arcade Shooter or not. Unreal Tournament 1999 was more realistic, lol! The guns are the same from MW2, even less shall i say.The companies definately get paid to give this high rating. I've been playing since the first Call of Duty ever, and i have to say, i never played Battlefield until today. Why? Because Modern Warfare 3 has been a huge let down. Too unrealistic gameplay, no matter Arcade Shooter or not. Unreal Tournament 1999 was more realistic, lol! The guns are the same from MW2, even less shall i say. The graphics are horrible, the engine on that has about 3 or 4 years old. The maps are disgusting, i could make better maps with the Black Ops Editor.. Call of Duty is now a trap for gamer kids. It's a Money machine. All they want is money, to keep making games, and they want it the easy way. People who give this a 10/10 got paid by Infinity Ward. Don't believe me? You are not a gamer. Look at PC, Intel pays people to give their products high rating, but atleast Intel has the Quality coming with it's product. Now look at this bunch of lazy Game Developpers called Infinity Ward, they failed big time. I hope one of their representative will see this. You failed! Why? For selling us a game that is so short, lacking in content, with a 3 or 4 years old Graphic engine, and the same story as Modern Warfare 2! This is basically worth 19,99$ at best brand new. I wasted money on that, but now i bought a high quality game worth to pay for called : Battlefield 3. There is also Medal of Honor (2010) which has been a very nice game. I am far from being a new gamer, i played the old MOH's, COD's, Wolfensteins and all those popular shooter, and this ain't worthy of being a game sold for 59,99 $ (MW3) ... Do not buy please. P.S: I am NOT a fan boy of any games, i am just a very ''IN'' gamer who is capable of making constructive reviews. Kids who give MW3 a 10/10 rating, please learn gaming industry aspects, and then you might be able to give the game his correct easy-earned rating (BAD rating) ... I am now playing Battlefield 3 and waiting for Medal Of Honor: Warfighter. Oh, also i can tell by MW3 being unrealistic cause i'm in the army. That's an addition to a constructive review. Let this franchise die, it's what it has earned. Thanks. Infinity Ward, next time think before making such a bad game, MW2 was bad, but you beat your death timer limit with MW3. Have fun players!… Expand
  94. Krection
    Apr 16, 2012
    2
    There obviously don't give a **** about the fans... Lack of support and changing. Gay ass hackers on every corner (On the PC) and **** No lobby servers? **** THAT! That was the gayest ****ing **** i have ever seen.
  95. Selo
    Jan 15, 2013
    2
    SP is acceptable but very short and havely scripted , the spec ops mission number is reduced compared to mw2 and they are not polyshed , aslo only 2 disigned for 2 players only.... The surviaval mode is a good idea but still not to many maps.... If you bought this game for MP then i say you make a mistake it is worse then mw2 , very lagy game even when you are the host, recently they addedSP is acceptable but very short and havely scripted , the spec ops mission number is reduced compared to mw2 and they are not polyshed , aslo only 2 disigned for 2 players only.... The surviaval mode is a good idea but still not to many maps.... If you bought this game for MP then i say you make a mistake it is worse then mw2 , very lagy game even when you are the host, recently they added lag to the host as lag compansation:) , weapons are very unbalanced , no real filters to the matchmaking like location , weapons etc The maps are preaty weak very unbalaced , piled with camping spots very few open spaces and the spawn system it`s retarded: you get kill you spawn behind the enemy , you kill the enemy the he spawns behind you :)) The only good thing is the dedicated servers but they are unranked... The graphics are outdated it`s 95% mw2 it uses the same engine and hackers rule the game there is no way to stop them so be prepare they kill you outside the map. 1 year + after game release and you can still find bugs in SP and MP like geting stuck in prone AI teleports to you etc... If you buy the game i recomand to not pay more then 10$ i paid 15$ for row version and regret it even dow the co-op is ok . If you have money to burn then try BF3 Premium edition for 30$ when it`s on sale and you get 29 maps and much more fun :D… Expand
  96. Starscream56PL
    Apr 29, 2012
    2
    Well, maybe this game would make me a pleasure but two years ago in mw2. I just fell raped by activision because of buying the same **** Well, may mw2 was great, but if i want to play mw2, i will just turn on it, mw3 should improve gameplay on this old graphic engine. Kotick just laught because all of you where a big part of his joke. I think that BO2 won't in any way different than this ****
  97. Cooldude731
    Jun 15, 2012
    2
    This game was for sure a let down, compared to the previous Modern Warfare titles. The campaign was only about 5 hours long and not to mention, very low difficulty along with poorly made missions. Now special ops, isn't that "special." The missions are basically just worser versions of the Modern Warfare 2 special ops missions. The only good thing about it was "survival" mode, which isThis game was for sure a let down, compared to the previous Modern Warfare titles. The campaign was only about 5 hours long and not to mention, very low difficulty along with poorly made missions. Now special ops, isn't that "special." The missions are basically just worser versions of the Modern Warfare 2 special ops missions. The only good thing about it was "survival" mode, which is just another form of Nazi Zombies. Even with the survival the special ops is still bad. Now the multiplayer is just awful. It is just the same old, kill, rank up, unlock guns. Really, you'd think they could create a different sort of multiplayer gameplay, but no just the same stuff from previous CoD's. The gameplay is very unbalanced, because of overpowered weapons like the MP7, P90 and all that. The maps were poorly made, just flat with tons of camping spots, to help support the newbies playing the game. Along, with terrible spawning. Like you could spawn right next to an enemy and die instantly. So, if you still play any of the previous Modern Warfare titles and still enjoy them, stay away from this title until the prices drops.… Expand
  98. Blastergun58
    Aug 8, 2012
    2
    franchement j'ai était déçu ! un moteur graphique super vieux et réutilisé depuis cod 4. pour quand allons nous avoir quelque chose qui soit a la hauteur de bf3et bientot bf4 ? il serai Temp de se bougé car ses du grand n'importe quoi surtout que Activision va jusqu'à quémander des meilleur score au joueur sur meta critique.
  99. Ramiroquai
    Nov 28, 2012
    2
    Full cheaters here, and Activision dont make nothing about it!. And Activision dont make nothing about it!. That is very sad. That is 60 buck to the trash!
  100. PuffPass
    Dec 9, 2012
    2
    I can honestly say that this game was the biggest **** You to the face to all the fans of the COD franchise. I cannot find any positive about this game and this is clear evidence Infinity Ward doesn't give the slightest **** about their customers and especially on PC. Poorly coded game, every second game flooded with hackers, no ranked dedicated servers, and the game engine that has beenI can honestly say that this game was the biggest **** You to the face to all the fans of the COD franchise. I cannot find any positive about this game and this is clear evidence Infinity Ward doesn't give the slightest **** about their customers and especially on PC. Poorly coded game, every second game flooded with hackers, no ranked dedicated servers, and the game engine that has been same since cod 4. I'm not a graphic whore but the graphics and especially the gun sounds are damn joke considering it's ****ing 2011. Plus the support package along with deathstreaks? I cannot belive they put this **** to reward the bad players. How lovely it is to get killstreak ruined by 3 stealth bombers and emps in a single game or a player using final stand which was asked to be taken out since mw2. BO2 is the last chance for me and if it sucks I'm never coming back to COD again.… Expand
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 »