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. Marduk
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Call of Duty... Such a great series of games which brought whole new level to FPS type of games. Thanks to CoD the shooters look like they look. So where is the problem??

    The problem is the technology. Activision didn't invest any money since CoD 2 to develop new engine (Yes Since CoD 2 its the same engine slightly modified), they managed to improve it up to CoD 4 but then they reached    Call of Duty... Such a great series of games which brought whole new level to FPS type of games. Thanks to CoD the shooters look like they look. So where is the problem??

    The problem is the technology. Activision didn't invest any money since CoD 2 to develop new engine (Yes Since CoD 2 its the same engine slightly modified), they managed to improve it up to CoD 4 but then they reached limit of it. Did they bother to develop new one? No. Since that time nothing changed. Same animations of characters, weapons and look of maps. They are trying to blind us through doing stuff like replacing zombies with 2 player co-op, new game mode and few new weapons model, but that's all. If you are going to get that game prepare for disappointment. Activision managed to sink all the way to the bottom of the sea one of the best FPS series in history of video games - Well done! From the king to the street beggar. I think it's time for CoD to retire for couple of years and come up with something new. Single player - stopping WW3 sounds great, you have the same characters (that didn't die) from previous version of MW. Map design is simple - get from point A to point B. Don't worry you won't get lost on the way. Guess why... CoD1 offered several different paths to reach objective and that's what should be restored! I don't care about fancy explosions!

    Multiplayer - its just map pack for MW2.

    Conclusion? Get different game because this one is worth only half of it's current price...    … Expand
  2. Javier19
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Rehashed garbage, Infinity Ward created this game, Activision destroyed it, they broke up Infinity Ward and put Sledgehammer games in charge

    Terrible game, avoid at all costs, see high scores from official reviews? Publishers pay them heaps of money to do PROMOS on their website, so they are inclined to get positive reviews, a reviewer on a website once lost his job for giving an honest,    Rehashed garbage, Infinity Ward created this game, Activision destroyed it, they broke up Infinity Ward and put Sledgehammer games in charge

    Terrible game, avoid at all costs, see high scores from official reviews? Publishers pay them heaps of money to do PROMOS on their website, so they are inclined to get positive reviews, a reviewer on a website once lost his job for giving an honest, low score to Kane & Lynch when his website was being paid to give it a promo.

    Oh and its so rehashed, there's actually an article proving the same building model from the now 4 year old COD4 where used in this game, despite it being one of the best selling if not the best selling franchise of all time, they are still so cheap.    … Expand
  3. inVader
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    So lets talk about MW2...woops I mean MW3. To be honest, I saw this coming. I knew that this game would just be a MW2 DLC. Unfortunately, the brand "Call of Duty" still attracts the masses of idiots who go for the name not the game. The only reason Activision published this pile of rubbish is because they could have just slapped the name Modern Warfare 3 on a copy of Justin Beiber's DVDSo lets talk about MW2...woops I mean MW3. To be honest, I saw this coming. I knew that this game would just be a MW2 DLC. Unfortunately, the brand "Call of Duty" still attracts the masses of idiots who go for the name not the game. The only reason Activision published this pile of rubbish is because they could have just slapped the name Modern Warfare 3 on a copy of Justin Beiber's DVD and people would still buy it. What it all comes down to is that the console gaming population has an average IQ of around 30. Living in denial that there is no better game than Call of Duty. It is only the rest of the gaming population that tweaks their head to left of the games shelf to realise Battlefield 3 came out too, a MODERN, INNOVATIVE and BRILLIANTLY BEAUTIFUL FPS actually does exist! Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed the previous Call of Duty games (Treyarch being my favourable developer of the series) but this is just a ridiculous game. In conclusion, the majority of the gaming population (mainly console) has turned stupid, maybe this is why unemployment is such a big issue. I don't buy for a name. I buy for a game.… Expand
  4. argyllcampbell
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Just rented it, to test it out, and it's just the same old crap. Nothing original. Just trying to ride out the money train. Campaign is the same monotonous, "kill generic bad guys to get to the next scripted event", garbage. You can just play any other modern warfare to get the same multiplayer
  5. Shadowmind
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    12 Hours of single payer game play. Holds true to the COD franchise's lack of content from the past 3 installments. Though those 12 hours of gameplay was more compelling than Black Ops, I still feel incredibly cheated out of $60. Online play is no better than Black Ops. Not just graphically, but the levels almost look like the same levels as BO... Laggy servers, gives laggy movements and12 Hours of single payer game play. Holds true to the COD franchise's lack of content from the past 3 installments. Though those 12 hours of gameplay was more compelling than Black Ops, I still feel incredibly cheated out of $60. Online play is no better than Black Ops. Not just graphically, but the levels almost look like the same levels as BO... Laggy servers, gives laggy movements and firing ingame. Then, they try to sweeten us up with their "Elite" service, but only to find out it will cost you ANOTHER $50. Come on Sledgehammer, can we get a reach around when you're giving us the hammer??? I would say avoid this one... But we all bought it sight unseen already.... Oh well.… Expand
  6. KX99Ex
    Nov 14, 2011
    0
    Just disappointing and nothing more. No improves on graphic, unclear story, control with a lot of rubbish setting.... It is worst in MW1 and MW2..... Even worse than COD 7
  7. AlphaRebel
    Nov 14, 2011
    0
    Played ANY cod game before? then you will have seen everything on offer.
    Fan of MW1? rinse, repeat and save yourself a few quid.

    Same engine, a few new weapons and perks in MP and another chapter in the story.

    This would be a free content patch in a Valve game and DLC by other publishers.
    Recommend you check out BF3 tbh.
  8. Lawgun
    Dec 15, 2011
    1
    Worst game trilogy ever. Every game is exactly the same. Old graphic, old sounds, old mechanics of game. Why THIS have a price? For what? For replay? Small maps in multiplayer. Even free mmofps better.
  9. VintageDoctor
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    Why do I have such a low score? I wanted to give it as high of a score as Modern Warfare 2 (since I thought I was playing that exact game), but when I realized it was not MW2, I had to give it a low score. But in all seriousness, Modern Warfare 3, the third in the series, is direct downgrade from MW2. It's even worse than Black Ops. I cannot believe just how terrible it is compared toWhy do I have such a low score? I wanted to give it as high of a score as Modern Warfare 2 (since I thought I was playing that exact game), but when I realized it was not MW2, I had to give it a low score. But in all seriousness, Modern Warfare 3, the third in the series, is direct downgrade from MW2. It's even worse than Black Ops. I cannot believe just how terrible it is compared to Battlefield 3, or any other Call of Duty game out there.… Expand
  10. ETisME
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    I won't give it a 0 because that is unreasonable. The BIGGEST reason why it doesn't deserve anything higher than 1 is quite simple. Recycled buildings, UI is almost exactly the same as previous games, 3 hours campaign (really?). The game could have been released as a single game. It pains me to see my friend buying it only because "it is the newest one". The game doesn't justifyI won't give it a 0 because that is unreasonable. The BIGGEST reason why it doesn't deserve anything higher than 1 is quite simple. Recycled buildings, UI is almost exactly the same as previous games, 3 hours campaign (really?). The game could have been released as a single game. It pains me to see my friend buying it only because "it is the newest one". The game doesn't justify itself for the cost at all.… Expand
  11. FlyingLeibowitz
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Is this seriously what games have become? Just awful. I could see someone having a lot of fun, assuming they took this game out and put in a better one.
  12. lemafish
    Mar 1, 2013
    5
    ok this review is going to be in 2 parts single player and muitiplayer. first of all single player, is fun campaign is actually enjoyable and there are some fun things in there to do. the next is spec ops, this is actually another good point for the game and finally "surival" you will either hate or love this mode, depending if you like wave defence games or not. so for single play i wouldok this review is going to be in 2 parts single player and muitiplayer. first of all single player, is fun campaign is actually enjoyable and there are some fun things in there to do. the next is spec ops, this is actually another good point for the game and finally "surival" you will either hate or love this mode, depending if you like wave defence games or not. so for single play i would give it a soild 8 out of 10. the next bit of the review is multiplayer..... this had the poeatinoal to be good, but failled masively! firstly, there are deticated servers but they are useless as you do not earn exp. next is the amount of 12 year old kids hacking, quite frankly this pissed me off so much i stopped playing the entire multiplayer all togther, as activision doesnt care and lets the hacker roam messing up all your games. finally the lag in multiplayer is dreadful as it is not a deticated server, you get host migrations? what the hell is this meant to be? oh yeah thats right they use that system on a console, this does not work on pc at all. i would give mulitiplayer a 3. do not get this game if you want to play if for the multiplayer its awful. overall then i would give this game a 6, becasue of its good single player, but avoid its multiplayer.… Expand
  13. esquizoide
    Nov 14, 2011
    1
    This is just a maps pack for MW1! And the game takes no skill whatsoever, no need for aiming, no need for caring about health, no need for strategy. At least there are a lot of explosions and bullets, so it is kinda entertaining specially if you play with your friends at home a friday night.
  14. mikeh
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    A really repetitive campaign with hardly any memorable moments. Out-dated visuals which look like a game from 4 years ago. Mediocre music and sounds.

    The multi-player feels slower than MW2 and the maps are just downright terrible. Lots of models, buildings and textures just copy-pasted from MW2. Overall, I'm seriously disappointed in this and i expected more from IW. Don't waste your    A really repetitive campaign with hardly any memorable moments. Out-dated visuals which look like a game from 4 years ago. Mediocre music and sounds.

    The multi-player feels slower than MW2 and the maps are just downright terrible. Lots of models, buildings and textures just copy-pasted from MW2.

    Overall, I'm seriously disappointed in this and i expected more from IW. Don't waste your money on this, you'd be better off buying MW1 or 2 as both are superior games.    … Expand
  15. exo88
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    I'm a huge cod fan and I've played every single one so far. Last year BO was a huge let down for me but this... this is just **** . I've tested it for about 10 hours and I'm GLAD that I didn't waste my money on it.
  16. freddyvito
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Terrible game. Cut and paste of mw2. It is so bad, don't even try it out. Barely anything has changed and it sucks. It is just a $60 dollar expansion pack. Huge disappointment on the pc.
  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. MB_
    Feb 18, 2012
    0
    Having enjoyed MW1 back in the day but not trying MW2 I thought I'd jump forward with three to see how far things had come. They really hadn't graphically. This looks terrible, I really can't think of a game that looks this bad in modern times. I've tried repeatedly to fix it, but that shouldn't be hard to do. Little things like not being able to turn down the sound and music separatelyHaving enjoyed MW1 back in the day but not trying MW2 I thought I'd jump forward with three to see how far things had come. They really hadn't graphically. This looks terrible, I really can't think of a game that looks this bad in modern times. I've tried repeatedly to fix it, but that shouldn't be hard to do. Little things like not being able to turn down the sound and music separately irritate immensely but when I got online things turned even worse. The game is a first person shooter but its using the geeky XP system which makes games unfair against newbies, purely by giving early adopters weapon and equipment bonuses. This is just morally bankrupt. The game looks bad, plays worse. I feel ripped off! Avoid!!… Expand
  19. Cinqnic
    Nov 14, 2011
    0
    Why anyone would like to play this? Nothing has changed and I don't think it ever will. Sorry but every 9-10 score is a lie in honest customer face. For example game engine is so old, that i want to cry. When i bought MW3 all i saw was fact that budget for this game was like 5% to making product and 95% for commercial noise. Sorry guys, this was definately last time with this crap.
  20. Seibab
    Feb 18, 2012
    3
    Copy and paste.
    Copy and paste.
    See, I can do it too Infinity Ward/Activision! Call of Duty 4 was an innovative, very addictive and fun game, and so are all of the call of duties after it up to Modern Warfare 3, because essentially they are all the same game, especially in multiplayer where new maps and a few new guns are the only difference. Also, with this being a new game, I'm surprised    Copy and paste.
    Copy and paste.
    See, I can do it too Infinity Ward/Activision! Call of Duty 4 was an innovative, very addictive and fun game, and so are all of the call of duties after it up to Modern Warfare 3, because essentially they are all the same game, especially in multiplayer where new maps and a few new guns are the only difference. Also, with this being a new game, I'm surprised by the muddy visuals and drab textures/colors, even compared to past games in the series.    … Expand
  21. DIStroyinmasses
    Nov 11, 2011
    0
    More and more each year, the publisher start to care less about the hardcore gamer (who got them here in the first place) & more about $ signs. This is Modern Warfare 1.9, everything is the same as Modern Warfare 2 apart from weapons , which still kinda feel the same but just look different. The maps are new but worse in my opinion.
  22. Coreman53
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    The reason we all hate this game is because it's 4 hour campaign and like 12 new maps. There is no way you can charge 60 dollars for that. It's annoying how well this game is going to sell when so little effort was put into it. We as gamers support developers that bring us NEW and INNOVATIVE products. Sure, it's fine when companies release sequels to games that refine the previous formula,The reason we all hate this game is because it's 4 hour campaign and like 12 new maps. There is no way you can charge 60 dollars for that. It's annoying how well this game is going to sell when so little effort was put into it. We as gamers support developers that bring us NEW and INNOVATIVE products. Sure, it's fine when companies release sequels to games that refine the previous formula, but not when they literally do it 3 times in a row. Modern Warfare, Modern Warfare 2, Black Ops, and Modern Warfare 3 literally look identical. It's like they want to be the new madden of first person shooters. We are tired of these pointless rehashed games. So basically deal with it Activision.… Expand
  23. Sanguineviper
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Oh look, it's the Madden of shooters. Why do people keep giving Kotick $60 for exactly the same shooter every year? Can't you people just like, i dunno, play CoD4? Or do they shut down the servers for games on consoles ala: Chromehounds? Pirated it to see the campaign, same old "WOOOOOAAAAH ACTION MOVIE EXPLOSHUNS!", beat it in 3 hours, then promptly deleted its disgusting code off myOh look, it's the Madden of shooters. Why do people keep giving Kotick $60 for exactly the same shooter every year? Can't you people just like, i dunno, play CoD4? Or do they shut down the servers for games on consoles ala: Chromehounds? Pirated it to see the campaign, same old "WOOOOOAAAAH ACTION MOVIE EXPLOSHUNS!", beat it in 3 hours, then promptly deleted its disgusting code off my HD. The multiplayer is exactly the same as the others with the same call-in fueled infini kill streaks from the two guys camping in a corner of the map. The sound design is still absolutely disgusting, all the guns sound like airsoft guns in first person, there's no distant effects, and they're still recycling voice clips from CoD4. The graphics are still living back in 2005, running on the same engine since CoD2, nothing else to say there... Enjoy paying $60 for your map-pack and "new perk" DLC guys.… Expand
  24. FlantroN
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    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.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. BF33333333333333333333 IS VERY GOOOOOOOD… Expand
  25. tiagolsn
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    resumo do meu status

    RazielDe 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    resumo do meu status

    RazielDe

    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
  26. Lambdadelta
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Absolutely terrible. It's just a moneymaking attempt, churning out the same game every year. Not having ranked dedicated servers is absurd; you're forced into more laggy p2p play where the host is favoured
  27. cornishman
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    If you like to play games that are just repacked versions of previous titles, then by all means by this crap.
    This game is so much like MW2 it should have been called MW2.5 or something, you are being charged full price for a game that is a damn map pack with a few new weapons from MW2.
    If you haven't already seen, there a numerous occasions during multi-player/single-player where    If you like to play games that are just repacked versions of previous titles, then by all means by this crap.
    This game is so much like MW2 it should have been called MW2.5 or something, you are being charged full price for a game that is a damn map pack with a few new weapons from MW2.

    If you haven't already seen, there a numerous occasions during multi-player/single-player where buildings from MW2 have actually been copied over, without changing, its a joke!

    I am honestly surprised at Activision and Infinity Ward for destroying this franchise with such a cheap rip-off. I have been a fan of the series since CoD 1 (you know, the one that was based in WWII) but I would actually go back and play that, than this!

    My recommendation is to buy it when it's cheaper, if I had known prior, I wouldn't have bought it until it was at least half what it is now!    … Expand
  28. Sinestru
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    They just took Modern Warfare 2 and changed the maps. Modern Warfare 3 is essentially a map pack that costs $49.99. Now even the devs are begging people to rate it higher. Can you get more desperate than this, Infinity Ward? Modern Warfare was the last good Call of Duty game.
  29. Zpiff
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    The PC edition of this game is completely worthless, and I regret ever purchasing it. Black Ops had way more options in the settings for actually setting the game up properly, so you don't get motion sick as fast, a better unlock system and proper dedicated servers, and that was considered one of the worst CoD's in a while.

    Instead I got a version I can't play because I get physically ill    The PC edition of this game is completely worthless, and I regret ever purchasing it. Black Ops had way more options in the settings for actually setting the game up properly, so you don't get motion sick as fast, a better unlock system and proper dedicated servers, and that was considered one of the worst CoD's in a while.

    Instead I got a version I can't play because I get physically ill after playing it because of the PoV, where I can not play ranked on the dedicated servers they bragged about before release, and which in most ways is exactly the same game as MW2. Visuals haven't improved, textures and models are extremely unappealing, balance is still off-key and we're back to stacking kill-streaks again. How fun that was as a semi-casual player, right? To summarize, the campaign is still linear, the story is terrible, and the multiplayer experience hasn't been altered in any positive way since MW2. If you like that, get it on consoles. The PC version is broken, possibly beyond repair.

    All in all, I'm extremely disappointed with this game, and I most likely will not play it again. Basically wasted a bunch of money I could have spent on a better game, had the game reviewers done their jobs and actually been honest instead of thinking about continued profits from game publishers.

    They even have the sheer audacity and arrogance to beg for better user reviews, as seen here: http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/121/1212113p1.html

    If not for that quote, this would have gotten a 3 or maybe a weak 4 from me, so they shot themselves in the foot.    … Expand
  30. bmghuehue
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Crappy rehash. They keep releasing this stuff year after year, and we just keep buying it. No more, this was the last time I ever purchased a Call of Duty game, at least until they decide to innovate instead of using the same game with a few new maps.
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 »