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. IIMurphaII
    Nov 24, 2011
    7
    I have never really been a follower of the Call of Duty games; Back in the day, it was Medal of Honor or nothing, but since EA managed to practically destroy that series, like they did with many others (think C&C), I have been forced to look elsewhere. So here I am at Modern Warfare 3. Because I am somewhat lazy, I am just going to create a list of some dot-points.

    *It's the first COD    I have never really been a follower of the Call of Duty games; Back in the day, it was Medal of Honor or nothing, but since EA managed to practically destroy that series, like they did with many others (think C&C), I have been forced to look elsewhere. So here I am at Modern Warfare 3. Because I am somewhat lazy, I am just going to create a list of some dot-points.

    *It's the first COD game I have played competitively online and I am enjoying the experience; aside from some bugs. One thing that does annoy me is that there is no big maps, so you are usually forced to use close-to-medium range guns. I can also understand why IW didn't change the multiplayer experience too much - it would have alienated the fan base. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", comes to mind here.

    *I do agree with most people here - the engine for this game is aging too much. Sure it has improved slightly over each game, but no matter how many labels IW slaps on the engine, its still the same thing. "No matter how much you polish turd...". The colours are dull and washed out, textures are flat and low resolution, shadows are horrible, the foliage does not look great, and the overall definition of the game ain't there. It's time for a new engine - one that actually looks decent on a 1080p screen.

    *Let's be honest here, I didn't buy COD for the campaign, so I don't care how mediocre it may seem, but as long as there is one I am not fussed. The storyline itself was extremely short and full of almost every cliche known to man. One big Hollywood explosion-fest. Where are the war games that actually make you feel the real emotions of war and the morals behind it all? A game that really makes you think about your actions or question what is happening in front of you. I know it might be hard to portray in an interactive media like games, but I'm sure its probably not entirely impossible.

    To sum it up, future COD games need a new engine, better story lines, and more map sizes and varieties. I'm not saying it has to compete with BF3 in terms of gameplay, like most people here ( That would be like comparing apples to oranges. One game offers large-scale multilayer with vehicles, the other is more like a death match arena game), it just has to improve it's core - what made it great in the first place. My decision to purchase Modern Warfare 3 was simple; I haven't owned a COD game before, and wanted to experience what the fuss was all about by purchasing the latest installment. I couldn't really careless about the previous games (although I did like World at War).

    And about he contrasting scores here on Metacritic - it was insane what the critics rated the game, I don't think it deserves that high of a score. As for the user reviews, most are people who compare it to BF3 or who feel betrayed, let-down, or conned by IW/Activision by not delivering a game that lives up to its very own hype, or the users own expectation. At the end of the day, who is more likely to voice their opinion? Someone who has something positive to say, or someone who has something negative to say?    … Expand
  2. arlperez94
    Nov 18, 2011
    8
    CoD MW3 es un buen juego y muy entretenido pero despues de 4 años sigue siendo igual que su gran antecesor: CoD 4. Es un copia y pega de sus anteriores entregas...
  3. granny
    Nov 19, 2011
    10
    I bought license for MW2, Black Ops and finally MW3 so far.. and the biggest disappointment is... Black Ops. Because of the poor optimisation for Win 7 (as far as i read). MW3 thought brought things up for the series, as far as I'm concerned, being everything that MW2 was to me and more. No DirectX 11, no completely new things? That's allright, I'm not necessary looking for testing on myI bought license for MW2, Black Ops and finally MW3 so far.. and the biggest disappointment is... Black Ops. Because of the poor optimisation for Win 7 (as far as i read). MW3 thought brought things up for the series, as far as I'm concerned, being everything that MW2 was to me and more. No DirectX 11, no completely new things? That's allright, I'm not necessary looking for testing on my own money, and don't like giving up on framerates for new titles that reach new tech standards. With my E8400 and GTX460 this game is a peach. The only minus I see is lack of servers in my region for a good ping and maybe the price.… Expand
  4. OmnipotentPrime
    Nov 19, 2011
    7
    As most Launch titles are these days they always require a bit of patching. A lot of the Imbalance in MW2 was eliminated by Nerfing and Removing certain elements, but compensated by the extra perks, point streaks and Unorthodox Maps. Gameplay still retains it's tradition with a few new extras.
    Love the idea with having Both Matchmaking and Dedicated Servers but disappointed on not being    As most Launch titles are these days they always require a bit of patching. A lot of the Imbalance in MW2 was eliminated by Nerfing and Removing certain elements, but compensated by the extra perks, point streaks and Unorthodox Maps. Gameplay still retains it's tradition with a few new extras.
    Love the idea with having Both Matchmaking and Dedicated Servers but disappointed on not being able to use console commands.

    In my Opinion Activision Should Follow the Paths of Blizzard and Valve Alike, Make only a few games and patch them on a regular basis. But when Money is involved i dnt think thats going to happen Overall An Ok game at that, might wait till it's ben patched a bit better.    … Expand
  5. Travo
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    This game, like the other Call of Duty games is a lot of fun and it is probably actually worthy of an 8.5-9 score. However for people who fork out money on these call of duty games each time they are released will see it differently because it is practically the same thing over and over. To someone who is new to call of duty they will love this game but for those who are familiar with theThis game, like the other Call of Duty games is a lot of fun and it is probably actually worthy of an 8.5-9 score. However for people who fork out money on these call of duty games each time they are released will see it differently because it is practically the same thing over and over. To someone who is new to call of duty they will love this game but for those who are familiar with the franchise will feel like they have been robbed and like myself will feel that they have purchased a glorified map pack or DLC. If the reviews and ratings of a game are an influence in some gamers decision to buy a game, and therefore the sales numbers will encourage developers to continue recycling their old games then i think its a bit of a 'slap in the face' to those who have supported the franchise.… Expand
  6. n3whous3
    Nov 20, 2011
    9
    Let's start with the fact that I did not play with CoD before (just the FIRST part back in the early-mid 2000's) so this review will be a cod n00bs point of view
    - I am familiar with the system that ranking is dedicated ONLY to supervised servers. I totally don't know why are these flamers want it. Dedicated servers needs to be a place where clans are preparing for wars and championships    Let's start with the fact that I did not play with CoD before (just the FIRST part back in the early-mid 2000's) so this review will be a cod n00bs point of view
    - I am familiar with the system that ranking is dedicated ONLY to supervised servers. I totally don't know why are these flamers want it. Dedicated servers needs to be a place where clans are preparing for wars and championships or friends who want to challenge each other on a LAN party or somewhat. I'm currently thinking WHAT kind of purpose would be to rank up on a dedicated server... HM I GET IT NOW, SO YOU ALL **** WAREZ VERSION OWNERS CAN USE ALL FEATURES OF THE GAME. WELL, NO U DON'T
    - I saw that many of you wanted to have a custom POV angle setting, well that would be some feature for the hardcore games but I don't get it, if you are hardcore cod multi players, why do you want to have ranking on dedi. servers(to get back to the prev. question again). If I would be a hardcore cod clan multi-player then I would want all the available guns and features immediately to train for wars and well, the dedi. servers give you this choise... Just again a minor point to show you all metacritic people that the 0-10 point reviews all are bunch of **** and childish flame.
    - Graphics: no change from the previous version as I saw, but i am noob in this game so this is something new for me, i don't care. Hardcore multi-gamers should not aware this thing either...
    - Multiplayer - fairly lot of changes as I see after i read and heard things from friends and blogs about mw2. Fairly enough content, lots of stages and coop missions
    - Single: adrenalin pushing content, unluckily I am now in the middle of a story and I don't know some things back in the MW2 but who cares. The only thing which is bothering me and is confusing that the story is about lots of different soldiers, we are jumping between these places and to tell the truth I can't totally feel myself in the story in this way. And to point on the haters' POV, most of them just throwing here a "single is **** phrases, I think this is totally not enough review of the content ;-)
    - Sounds: thrilling

    My POV tells a 9 point of 10 for this game, but I would give a 7 if i would be a cod fan: 80% would be a fair point and I would minus down 10% for disappointment: content reusage is so high in this game that this is some kind of DLC of MW2 and not a new game    … Expand
  7. Mr_P
    Dec 1, 2011
    7
    The game itself, i regret was rather poorly done. With those outdated graphics it kind of felt like a rehash of Modern Warfare 2. However i can tell you it is actually enjoyable to play and has those usual COD moments where you think "OH YEAH!!". The multiplayer is poorly done with its lack of dedicated servers, but still delivers the kick that you can expect from a COD game. A nice game,The game itself, i regret was rather poorly done. With those outdated graphics it kind of felt like a rehash of Modern Warfare 2. However i can tell you it is actually enjoyable to play and has those usual COD moments where you think "OH YEAH!!". The multiplayer is poorly done with its lack of dedicated servers, but still delivers the kick that you can expect from a COD game. A nice game, but could have been better. (also why with the Battlefield fanboy reviews, it kind of annoyed me how obviously bias the reviews where, it wasn't just COD 2.5. there was a lot of differences.)… Expand
  8. 3dsoftworks
    Jan 8, 2012
    7
    While I thoroughly enjoyed playing the game itself, one of my biggest gripes is with the prelude narration which sounds like it's being spoken by someone who's about 16 or 17 years old. Other than that, it's a great game with a lot of action and cinematic sequences.
  9. ScrewBF3
    May 26, 2012
    10
    best game I ever played, simply amazing
    Everything up there is a pile of **** I decided to write 'cause i could.
    i am actually a nice guy. Here is my top ten movie list: 1o. The Shining. It is absolutely classic. 9. Alien. The first time I saw it i was scared ****less. 8. The Children of the Corn. It is almost as messed up as 'IT'. 7. Shaun of the Dead. Funny. Funny. Funny. 6. Hellraiser.    best game I ever played, simply amazing
    Everything up there is a pile of **** I decided to write 'cause i could.
    i am actually a nice guy. Here is my top ten movie list:
    1o. The Shining. It is absolutely classic.
    9. Alien. The first time I saw it i was scared ****less.
    8. The Children of the Corn. It is almost as messed up as 'IT'.
    7. Shaun of the Dead. Funny. Funny. Funny.
    6. Hellraiser. It has a nice plot and Pinhead is awesome.
    5. Sleepaway Camp. Nobody remembers this movie but I reckon it was KICKASS.
    4. Nightmare on Elm Street. Also classic.
    3. Friday the 13th. Jason is almost too KICKASS.
    2. Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Pretty messed up but it kept me on the edge of my seat.
    (Drumrolls)
    1. Halloween. Myers is slightly KICKASS and the movie was brilliant.    … Expand
  10. hacmiu36
    Jan 7, 2013
    9
    Nice game, good story, i don't understand why are there so many people gave it a bad rate. If you gave it a bad rate, what do you think the story should be?
  11. Gerbscat
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    Terrible. same old same old garbage. wake up players. I bought this title with the intention of getting a game that was worth $60. Turns out that it was just a waste of money.
  12. 0235
    Dec 20, 2011
    8
    first off. Since MW2 my love for call of duty has gone downhill, but when i was told by many people how good MW3 was, i just had t ogo and get it. and to my complete and utter surprise, i found it was actually quite good. the single player was tight, bug free and apart from the COD 4 story, was wonderful, bringing back some amazing moments.
    as for the multiplayer, well i haven't touched    first off. Since MW2 my love for call of duty has gone downhill, but when i was told by many people how good MW3 was, i just had t ogo and get it. and to my complete and utter surprise, i found it was actually quite good. the single player was tight, bug free and apart from the COD 4 story, was wonderful, bringing back some amazing moments.
    as for the multiplayer, well i haven't touched that, and it would be a bit bias as i know i will be rubbish at it.    … Expand
  13. liho1eye
    Nov 13, 2011
    4
    None of the big issues from BO and MW2 were fixed. The MP is still based on listen servers. Yes, you can play on dedicated servers, but you can't unlock anything there, so you HAVE TO endure craptacular hit reg until you hit max level and unlock everything you need. Respawn system is still hard at work to make you claw your own eyes out. The rest of seems like a copy-paste of MW2, whichNone of the big issues from BO and MW2 were fixed. The MP is still based on listen servers. Yes, you can play on dedicated servers, but you can't unlock anything there, so you HAVE TO endure craptacular hit reg until you hit max level and unlock everything you need. Respawn system is still hard at work to make you claw your own eyes out. The rest of seems like a copy-paste of MW2, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but hardly worth the price of a full game.… Expand
  14. Sarra
    Nov 22, 2011
    3
    I didn't even buy BF 3 as planned, for some obvious reasons, but lets just say Origin to keep me from going on a rant. But BF3 being bad aside, this, this isn't even a PC game, it's a console port that was supposed to have dedicated servers. And it does, but it for un ranked. I have no idea what the hell they are thinking, but it certainly isn't to make good games. Gameplay wise, it's theI didn't even buy BF 3 as planned, for some obvious reasons, but lets just say Origin to keep me from going on a rant. But BF3 being bad aside, this, this isn't even a PC game, it's a console port that was supposed to have dedicated servers. And it does, but it for un ranked. I have no idea what the hell they are thinking, but it certainly isn't to make good games. Gameplay wise, it's the same as MW2, which was liek COD4 but with a bunch of stupid gimmicks. Save your money, rent for your PS3/360/Wii, but don't get for PC, please.… Expand
  15. Heaviermetal
    Nov 23, 2011
    5
    I gave it a shot, and as soon as I started.. BOOM; it felt very stale from the get go. However, they do know how to suck you in and do a great job of creating over the top action. The flaw is, MW4 wasn't this over the top. It had good pacing and felt smart. MW3, on the other-hand is like a kid with AA that keeps talking and jumping around. I get bored of playing it quick, because it justI gave it a shot, and as soon as I started.. BOOM; it felt very stale from the get go. However, they do know how to suck you in and do a great job of creating over the top action. The flaw is, MW4 wasn't this over the top. It had good pacing and felt smart. MW3, on the other-hand is like a kid with AA that keeps talking and jumping around. I get bored of playing it quick, because it just doesn't stop yelling at me. The missions feel for the most part, to short and just to much **** going on to take anything in. All the games like usual have some great ideas and gameplay moments, its just sad to see them all wasted in this game.… Expand
  16. Lost
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    okay what MW2 is. Mw2 is a re-skinned game with new maps, the game play is clunky the game is just overall a joke. I am telling you this now don't even bother to buy it maybe when its $20 but before that stay away my friends.
  17. TrollFace_McGee
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Worst game EVER. Of all time.
    The campaign of this game is terrible. Its linear, has bad writing, generic gameplay, and the graphics are showing its age. The whole game is you going trough narrow paths and shooting bad guys. One good thing about it is that the campaign lasts only 3 hours. They try to distract you from how bad it is with big explosions every two seconds but the engine is so    Worst game EVER. Of all time.
    The campaign of this game is terrible. Its linear, has bad writing, generic gameplay, and the graphics are showing its age. The whole game is you going trough narrow paths and shooting bad guys. One good thing about it is that the campaign lasts only 3 hours. They try to distract you from how bad it is with big explosions every two seconds but the engine is so old that they look just lame. Scene where a child is killed tries to generate controversy like the airport mission in MW2 but it fails miserably. The multiplayer is the same thing you already played several times before. Almost nothing is changed from the previous games. The new maps are bland and not worth it. The new modes are nothing special. If you are buying the game for its multiplayer, buy MW instead, its cheaper and better balanced. Also the game suffers from numerous bugs on the PC version. My advice is to stick with the first MW or just play a better FPS like RO2 or BF3.    … Expand
  18. Etna
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    I returned my Xbox360 copy to see how much better it would play on PC, and too be honest, its not even any better, in fact

    IT PLAYS WORSE, I've also returned this copy, if a game isnt fun in the first hour, then it's not worth continuing.
  19. Diospyros
    Nov 9, 2011
    5
    I will be calling my credit card company today because for some reason I was charged $60 for this DLC. Must be an accounting error, I am sure of it, because no sane company will charge a full-game price for what appears to be a quickie expansion, right?

    Don't get me wrong - the game is good, it is just not $60-good. Amount of work that was put into this game is a fraction of what it    I will be calling my credit card company today because for some reason I was charged $60 for this DLC. Must be an accounting error, I am sure of it, because no sane company will charge a full-game price for what appears to be a quickie expansion, right?

    Don't get me wrong - the game is good, it is just not $60-good. Amount of work that was put into this game is a fraction of what it typically takes to release a AAA title. So, why should Activision/IW/Sledgehammer be paid 3x more for 75% less work when compared to competition? Why is it ok to keep ripping off loyal fans year after year while delivering marginal content and minimal post-release support?

    I would have given this game a 9 if it cost around $20-25, but a quick expansion selling for $60 will only get a 5 from me. I will try to sell my copy of MW3 and will not touch another COD in the future.    … Expand
  20. 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
  21. 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
  22. 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
  23. sollaan
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Single player I feel was the only game that was done relatively well, although the storyline was a tad predictable. However i feel a majority of people bought this game for the multiplayer, and players like us, whom spend thousands of dollars on our custom rigs, and then hundreds of dollars in games don't expect to play something as mediocre as this was.
    The Call of Duty francise is a    Single player I feel was the only game that was done relatively well, although the storyline was a tad predictable. However i feel a majority of people bought this game for the multiplayer, and players like us, whom spend thousands of dollars on our custom rigs, and then hundreds of dollars in games don't expect to play something as mediocre as this was.
    The Call of Duty francise is a multi-million dollar industry, YET it refuses to spend this money on improving the game. instead this game has opted to using an engine that is over 2 years old, weapon sounds from previous games & not to mention that dreaded P2P network. what infinity ward has failed to understand is that if we wanted to play via P2P we would of bought an xbox or a PS3 not spend thousands of dollars on our rigs. Robert Bowling has some serious rethinking to do; to attempt at riving this dying franchise.    … Expand
  24. Neurotic
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    No dedicated servers.
    Awfull graphics and sound.
    Gameplay is identical to previous releases.
    They reuse all the same graphics, sound , models even the plot is a recycled piece of trash.

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

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