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. Axelle_1
    Sep 6, 2021
    6
    максимально ленивое окончание только сюжет здесь спасает, хотя и не очень то и сильно
  2. vova22379
    Dec 18, 2021
    6
    ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
  3. kndr
    Feb 1, 2022
    6
    It's not good as mw1 and 2. It just feels weak.

    Weapon sounds are bad. They sound like broken glass.

    Special ops gives you another perspective and there is also survival mode. But still it didn't leave the same impact as first mw's.
  4. Tropgam
    Jul 21, 2021
    6
    Its a 6 again
    I felt that the campaign was actually good, with many memorable scenes and a very memorable villain.
    However the multiplayer is basically the same as MW2 as i remember. Only a few changes and like a couple new modes but nothing really felt new. Spec ops though, is a huge improvement. Survival lasted me for hours. I would of gave this a 7/10, but the multiplayer being    Its a 6 again
    I felt that the campaign was actually good, with many memorable scenes and a very memorable villain.
    However the multiplayer is basically the same as MW2 as i remember. Only a few changes and like a couple new modes but nothing really felt new.
    Spec ops though, is a huge improvement. Survival lasted me for hours.
    I would of gave this a 7/10, but the multiplayer being basically the same is almost unforgivable.    … Expand
  5. Izoeros
    May 30, 2022
    6
    qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq
  6. Hyperfailure
    Apr 29, 2023
    6
    MW3 is the epitome of a middle-schoolers ideal game for the early 2010s. It has not aged well by any means, but it was the game that sucked me into the COD hole after my initial fascination with MW2. Co-op missions felt more rewarding the multiplayer.
  7. Sideline
    May 6, 2012
    5
    I finished the single player campaign of this game the same day I bought it. I don't mind short campaigns if they are fun, but this is very short and boring.
    The game is so heavily scripted it makes it obvious that Infinity Ward is out of ideas in terms of innovative gameplay. They use scripted events as fillers, and on top of that they manage to lack imagination in that field as well.    I finished the single player campaign of this game the same day I bought it. I don't mind short campaigns if they are fun, but this is very short and boring.
    The game is so heavily scripted it makes it obvious that Infinity Ward is out of ideas in terms of innovative gameplay. They use scripted events as fillers, and on top of that they manage to lack imagination in that field as well. How many times can we enjoy a scene where we get knocked down with the ears ringing and the blurry vision? Sure the part on the boat was awesome but that's about it as far as I'm concerned. For most of the campaign the player has to follow other characters, other than that it's pretty much "Do this! Go there!".
    I really do understand that the focus of this game is online but the game fails to be impressive and innovative on that side as well. I still give this game a 5 for the graphics and the input responsiveness but sadly Call of Duty has not evolved since Modern Warfare 1.    … Expand
  8. Holstsha
    Nov 15, 2011
    5
    Don't buy Skyrim and CODMW3 together, or you'll wind up playing this for 30 minutes and getting bored as hell, and Skyrim for 8 hours and have a blast.
  9. twister87
    Nov 8, 2011
    5
    I'll be frank, I'm a fan of the series. I really like that Activision brought fps war gaming out of WWII and into something that hits a little closer to home. The third instalment has a nice little wrap up to the story, albeit a tad predictable (I honestly think the first MW's story was the better). The co-op is a little tired but the survival mode is fun enough. However, I am once againI'll be frank, I'm a fan of the series. I really like that Activision brought fps war gaming out of WWII and into something that hits a little closer to home. The third instalment has a nice little wrap up to the story, albeit a tad predictable (I honestly think the first MW's story was the better). The co-op is a little tired but the survival mode is fun enough. However, I am once again let down by the major flaw in multiplayer, something called IWNet. Living in Australia with its **** internet, client-side hosting is the worst possible thing you can do to PC users here. It turns what would be quite an excellent and engaging multiplayer experience into a highly irritating and frustrating lag-fest, where you appear to be knifing an enemy in front of you, but in reality he was 5 metres away and shot you in the face. Over and over again. Yes there are dedicated servers this time around but, insultingly, they are unranked, which completely drains the attraction of levelling your skills and unlocking new weapons and abilities. It does get plusses for the inclusion of support pointstreaks and weapon levelling which are great ideas. Long story short: disappointing.

    PS: After reading some of the positive reviews from this and the other platforms, two things: anything bad to say about the game does not a 10 out of 10 make; and anyone who rages about the so called "BF3 Fanboys", your reviews are as much of a fail as theirs may be. For the record, I have played BF3 and it's fine but I don't like it a heck of a lot.    … Expand
  10. Markos
    Mar 5, 2013
    5
    It looks and plays pretty much EXACTLY the same as 2009's Modern Warfare 2, even the menus, sound effects, and buildings have been recycled from MW2. I feel extremely disappointed, the campaign and single player were shorter and barely better than MW2. Do not fall for the hype for this game, this game should have been a 15 dollar expansion for MW2, charging 60 for this should be a crime.
  11. StumpBeefknob
    Nov 9, 2011
    5
    Most expensive map pack ever made. Even looking at it as the standalone expansion that it is, its still not worth the $60 price tag. Basically you pay the usual $15 for the map pack, plus $45 for the 5 hour campaign. Yet, it will still sell millions of units. Stupid compulsive gamers.
  12. Browser
    Nov 23, 2011
    5
    It's an average shooter, nothing really stands out. Infact it's lacking even compared to older FPS games and that's before considering how badly it's ported to the PC.


    The campaign is short and the story could have come from a once off comic book for gun ho teens, presuming it could even keep them interested.

    Only good part worth mentioning is one point in the game where the playerIt's an average shooter, nothing really stands out. Infact it's lacking even compared to older FPS games and that's before considering how badly it's ported to the PC.


    The campaign is short and the story could have come from a once off comic book for gun ho teens, presuming it could even keep them interested.


    Only good part worth mentioning is one point in the game where the player is heavily armoured which is fun and changes things up, other than that there's nothing good to mention about Modern Warfare 3. It's beating a dead horse, that died in a previous game.… Expand

  13. squaids
    Nov 13, 2011
    5
    Having played the complete series both campaign and multi-player, I have to say its nice to have a new game but why so soon? They could have spent a lot more time between games thinking of something a little more original. I mean when I got to the second or third scene in the campaign I felt like I was playing MW2... While I like the faster pace during the missions or maybe its that IHaving played the complete series both campaign and multi-player, I have to say its nice to have a new game but why so soon? They could have spent a lot more time between games thinking of something a little more original. I mean when I got to the second or third scene in the campaign I felt like I was playing MW2... While I like the faster pace during the missions or maybe its that I selected a difficulty higher than NOOB, I don't know.. I would give the single player a 6 just because I'm sure a lot of work went into it and its not glitchy at all. I am going to have to say the multi-player is a 4 and the same game graphically as the last 2 (I know the dev's will rage because I said that but its true, move on, get a new engine please) Welcome to 2011.… Expand
  14. 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
  15. ThePCStandard
    Nov 9, 2011
    5
    Technically sub par with severely overrated gameplay and missing platform features.

    That sums up Call of Duty experience on the PC. The franchise is a technology dinosaur when it comes to the FPS genre, especially on the PC which hasn't stayed the same since 2007's release of the console centric Modern Warfare. It doesn't set the bar, in fact it's behind the curve significantly, and if    Technically sub par with severely overrated gameplay and missing platform features.

    That sums up Call of Duty experience on the PC. The franchise is a technology dinosaur when it comes to the FPS genre, especially on the PC which hasn't stayed the same since 2007's release of the console centric Modern Warfare. It doesn't set the bar, in fact it's behind the curve significantly, and if you're a PC gamer it's going to be instantly noticeable and painful. Painful because of how much of a bad console port it truly is. Elite service is missing outright. Ranked dedicated servers don't exist. It's back to console technology of peer-to-peer multiplayer networking. No advanced graphical technology or redesigned anything for increased player counters either.

    PC gamers should really not have to accept such things especially in a genre that was born on the PC. Continuing to purchase Call of Duty on the PC when every year the games lose more features for the PC platform specifically isn't going to change anything. Quit buying awful console ports with missing features PC gamers or else that's all you're going to have in the end. Support developers who incorporate the PC's strengths and are willing to go the extra couple of feet with multiplatform releases. 5: It functions and decent production values. It does nothing new, missing features, and significantly behind other competitors out there.    … Expand
  16. dc42
    Nov 12, 2011
    5
    After thinking about the original score I gave this (a zero) I decided to at least be nice and award it a 5. Five because you will have fun (just don't buy it at 60 bucks) but its something we've seen before (and something we'll see in 2012 as Activision ALREADY announced the new one). Some would say, don't fix something that isn't broken but there must be something wrong if people areAfter thinking about the original score I gave this (a zero) I decided to at least be nice and award it a 5. Five because you will have fun (just don't buy it at 60 bucks) but its something we've seen before (and something we'll see in 2012 as Activision ALREADY announced the new one). Some would say, don't fix something that isn't broken but there must be something wrong if people are giving it such a low rating. If you respect the gaming community (by not milking money out of us) we'll respect you, a pretty easy concept to remember… Expand
  17. DDaniel
    Nov 10, 2011
    5
    The game is still fun to play specially the multiplayer and survival mode but the downsides is so much more in this title that you just can't ignore them and start to regret that you bought it for $60. The support for PC version is so poor, you cant play on ranked servers, you can't adjust fov, horrible textures, and again the stupidest thing is back and worse the damn Iwnet with laggedThe game is still fun to play specially the multiplayer and survival mode but the downsides is so much more in this title that you just can't ignore them and start to regret that you bought it for $60. The support for PC version is so poor, you cant play on ranked servers, you can't adjust fov, horrible textures, and again the stupidest thing is back and worse the damn Iwnet with lagged matches. The problem is not that it is just more of the same is how poor the pc version is and how they don't care about what players want.… Expand
  18. beergogglesftw
    Nov 8, 2011
    5
    The good. The engine. Same as its been, but its good. No reason to mess with a good thing.
    The meh. The graphics. These graphics were very nice, 4 or 5 years ago now... now its simply Xbox graphics that don't stand up on the PC.
    The bad. Its not a full retail game. Its DLC or an expansion. Not a lot of changes, just little tweaks here and there. New maps, and a short unimpressive campaign    The good. The engine. Same as its been, but its good. No reason to mess with a good thing.
    The meh. The graphics. These graphics were very nice, 4 or 5 years ago now... now its simply Xbox graphics that don't stand up on the PC.
    The bad. Its not a full retail game. Its DLC or an expansion. Not a lot of changes, just little tweaks here and there. New maps, and a short unimpressive campaign that makes you thinkg "Haven't I played this already"

    If you're playing for multiplayer... there was really no reason for a new game. Its MW2 with new maps and an update patch. COD needs to take a year off and really put some time into a game... but they won't. Its all about getting more and more games out to make more and more money.    … Expand
  19. psyph3r
    Nov 20, 2011
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Firstly let me say i am extremely disappointed that this is the highest earning piece of entertainment in our civilization. This is like Justin Bieber and Twilight as they are to music and movies respectively.
    They throw crap at you and they still make a ton of money every year, the reasons for which are beyond my comprehension.
    I still remember playing the first Modern Warfare and being blown away by it. It was a breath of fresh air in the WW2 shooter infested era. That unfortunately was also the last FPS experience i have enjoyed.
    This game just goes on to show how much they have run out of ideas. The engine appears superbly dated and not worth running on a good rig, let alone warrant the full 60 dollar price. I am atleast glad they finished the story once and for all. A lot of ideas have been overused here , the slowmo breaching of countless rooms, following Capt.Price in stupid missions where the AI is so blind they'd walk over you and still not be able to spot you. Most of the missions here start off stealthily and end up becoming long and boring corridor sequences either in a street or a building. The layouts of the environment haven't changed much since the first game in the series and they have overused the idea of killing playable characters gradually over the sequels. The protagonist of the series spends more time on his deathbed in this title and it would have been nice to keep him alive as the series ended. I have to say this is the worst game in the series and the critic reviews just goes to show how you cannot trust these sites these days. How can this game get such a high score. But this series isn't meant for the SP experience and we are yet again given the same experience with micro tweaks and modes. Activision has suffered creatively since the core team left Infinity Ward to form Respawn entertainment and this clearly shows in the game. If you own a decent rig and like FPS, then the game to buy would be BF3 (even though it has its own set of issues). This is definitely a console FPS (yes they should call it this).
    The recoil in a weapon is barely present and the gameplay style is more lonewolf oriented. It is disturbing to see how low the series has gone over the past 2 games. Bottom line : Don't buy this so Activision can stop throwing the same crap at us year over year.
    Now that this game has been laid to rest , i am looking forward to some innovation from their side for the inevitable COD-9 slated for 2012 holiday season.    … Expand
  20. FFStudios
    Aug 6, 2012
    5
    Sum up MW3 in one word? Lazy, probably. Back in the days of the first Modern Warfare, the campaign was well-paced and only had the occasional set piece to awe you; whilst in MW3, you can't go 5 minutes without a building, plane or train falling and crashing six inches away from your face. The game becomes exhausting to play and then just turns out to be boring. It's not that I think theySum up MW3 in one word? Lazy, probably. Back in the days of the first Modern Warfare, the campaign was well-paced and only had the occasional set piece to awe you; whilst in MW3, you can't go 5 minutes without a building, plane or train falling and crashing six inches away from your face. The game becomes exhausting to play and then just turns out to be boring. It's not that I think they should revolutionize the graphics every time a new game comes out, but this game does very little new, even story-wise. The story is even more disjointed than MW2 if you can believe that; with a half-hearted structure and poorly developed characters. Do I even need to be babbling right now? Just don't buy this game, unless you're willing to part with £30 for what essentially amounts to just a boring campaign and dull maps. And no, I don't like Battlefield 3 either so let's just drop this argument.… Expand
  21. Radiation4FUN
    Nov 11, 2011
    5
    Modern warfare is the most expensive DLC MAP PACK... Available right now ... Doesn't deserve a 0 but the game play has began to be quit repeditive over the past 4 years .... And I'm fed up giving all my hard earned money to activision .... They have milked me and all of my friends for to long ... This will be the last one I ever purchase again in this series .... If u want a new map packModern warfare is the most expensive DLC MAP PACK... Available right now ... Doesn't deserve a 0 but the game play has began to be quit repeditive over the past 4 years .... And I'm fed up giving all my hard earned money to activision .... They have milked me and all of my friends for to long ... This will be the last one I ever purchase again in this series .... If u want a new map pack for MW2 buy it ... Otherwise save ur money , rent the game and move on… Expand
  22. xThePezx
    Nov 8, 2011
    5
    Overhyped and repetitious It lives up to its hype somewhat in certain areas of the single player, but the moment you hit multiplayer you realize the developers have just copy/pasted the good aspects of modern warfare 2 and filled the bad ones with even worse. Great campaign presentation filled with huge set pieces that are sure to keep you going that only just make up for its modernOverhyped and repetitious It lives up to its hype somewhat in certain areas of the single player, but the moment you hit multiplayer you realize the developers have just copy/pasted the good aspects of modern warfare 2 and filled the bad ones with even worse. Great campaign presentation filled with huge set pieces that are sure to keep you going that only just make up for its modern warfare 2 look. The story picks straight from where the previous game ended and starts of promising all the way to the end. All loose ends are dealt with, theirs a few small twists and fast paced moments that make up for the dumb AI and problems you know and hate from modern warfare 2, their are still those moments where you feel like your playing follow the leader but theirs no doubt you have more control and as I stated the set pieces are undeniably impressive. That is for the single player at least.
    The moment I hit multiplayer I was to a point horrified at how it actually looked worse than modern warfare 2. And this is running the game max settings@ 90+fps, after playing 5 out of the 15 available maps you can easily tell it has a horrible presentation. The colours are very bland and the textures are almost identical to modern warfare 2. Everything from explosions to smoke effects look the same. The animations have been ripped(literally) from modern warfare 2 (same slip on a banana peel death). The weapon sounds are the same as they were in modern warfare 2 which is no surprise but I don't need to get into that. I never really expect nice visuals from a game such as this but it still doesn't make up for its core aspects. Killstreaks are back and are unbalanced as ever, you now have strike packages that could have worked well but fail miserably due to unbalancing issues. For example the specialist pack gives you a perk for every two kills you get (your a super soldier once you hit 9 kills). The assault pack gives you things such as a Juggernaut killstreak that would take literally a whole M60 clip to kill. If you want zero recoil just throw on a suppressor. Their are so many gimmicks in this game I would need more pages than the bible to write out my essay but I think you get the point. The core COD experience that we love is still their but it simply doesn't make up for its negatives. Their are some aspects that I love that improve further on modern warfare 2s positives but once again are overtaken by all the crap in the game. It also feels very console ported and this is just another big issue I could raise. In the end a game that had potential falls short for the third second time, yes its better than black ops but if you want a true cod experience stick with modern warfare.
    Ok.
    6/10    … Expand
  23. gMcizzLe
    Nov 8, 2011
    5
    I pre-ordered both BF3 and MW3, trying not to be a fanboy to either in this comparison.

    BF3 isn't perfect but MW3 is a complete joke, especially on PC. If you are even thinking about MW3 on PC, forget it, just buy MW1 or Black Ops and have at least a 10x better experience. No ranked dedicated servers? Check. No adjustable FOV? Check. No real innovation from MW2? Check. I'm not really    I pre-ordered both BF3 and MW3, trying not to be a fanboy to either in this comparison.

    BF3 isn't perfect but MW3 is a complete joke, especially on PC. If you are even thinking about MW3 on PC, forget it, just buy MW1 or Black Ops and have at least a 10x better experience. No ranked dedicated servers? Check. No adjustable FOV? Check. No real innovation from MW2? Check.

    I'm not really one to care about graphics, but MW3's graphics are just laughable considering this is 2011. Comparing MW3 graphics to BF3 graphics is like comparing speed between a 1990 Neon and a 2012 Bugatti Veyron. BF3 gets huge props for their innovation in this department.

    Audio is even worse than graphics. As another poster pointed out, the guns literally sound like paintball or BB gun. Again, a joke when compared with BF3 which makes huge innovations here again.

    MW3 does have a much better campaign than BF3 though, and BF3's SP was disappointing considering what they could have done with all the new tech. Not sure how long MW3's campaign is though as I haven't finished it yet.

    Post-launch support from DICE has already been fantastic, and they do truly listen to the community on changes. I remember in BFBC2 Beta, I had an issue specific to my PC relating to low CPU usage, and I got an email from a dev who personally worked with me to resolve it. This fix was including with the final game. I don't have a lot of experience with Activision, but from what I've heard the only post-launch support they give is in paid DLC's.

    Overall, BF3 is definitely worth $60 where MW3 is definitely not worth $60.    … Expand
  24. SnatchReaper
    Nov 8, 2011
    5
    Basically this game is MW 2.1 or 2.5 as spec ops is very enjoyable. Single player campaign is a tired, used, and put away wet rehash of past WM titles. My main complaint is how short/easy (even on the hardest lvl). Finally and most disappointing MP is just plain dated; Black Ops could teach this game something in all aspects (balance, maps design, and getting the most out of the graphicsBasically this game is MW 2.1 or 2.5 as spec ops is very enjoyable. Single player campaign is a tired, used, and put away wet rehash of past WM titles. My main complaint is how short/easy (even on the hardest lvl). Finally and most disappointing MP is just plain dated; Black Ops could teach this game something in all aspects (balance, maps design, and getting the most out of the graphics engine). It is glaringly obvious that with the departure of the core members of Infinity Ward the "sledgehammer" (aka EA retreads) team assembled in haste was not up the task of creating a "new" CoD experience. In all honestly; considering the leap from World ar War to Black Op's (let's face it Black Ops MP trumps MW2); Treyarch would have been a much better team to tap; even though Activision's payout would have been delay. If you are looking for a $60 (low end and I truly do feel for the hardened Ed ppl) expansion then you will enjoy this game. I admit I too fell for the hype plus boredom of needing a new quality FPS fix; but came away with the feeling my score was cut to nothing. I worry with Activision's rush to cash in on the best FPS name in the market; the series will die out. I do hope their greed, lack of innovation, and pushing out unpolished games to meet quarterly profit goals; does not infect their only remaining quality game developer Blizzard. In closing; please do not lose heart or faith that Treyarch can somehow make a worthy game out of these dated graphic and shell of a stand alone sequel.… Expand
  25. Fogz
    Nov 8, 2011
    5
    Look at it from a different point of view. This game has spent 2 years in development! And this is the best they can come up with. Christ! my Nan could make a better go at a MW then IW. To start with the maps are as small as my back garden and encourage camping the the nth degree. Noob tubes have been toned down (thank god) but corners have been increased (not good). The guns feel sluggishLook at it from a different point of view. This game has spent 2 years in development! And this is the best they can come up with. Christ! my Nan could make a better go at a MW then IW. To start with the maps are as small as my back garden and encourage camping the the nth degree. Noob tubes have been toned down (thank god) but corners have been increased (not good). The guns feel sluggish and weak and with a level cap of 80 is going to be hard to hit with out going crazy. In the time it would take to get to level 80 I would recommend learning and instrument or something because its not worth it. Maybe the first 50 levels, but it gets old fast. Dont like comparing other games to this but BF3 creams all over this title.… Expand
  26. 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
  27. Heatednemz
    Nov 16, 2011
    5
    Call of duty is a franchise that has always been close to my heart. And within the franchise I have always enjoyed the infinity ward games, modern warfare was fresh, fun and overall a new experience given the many world war themed games we were used to playing. The multiplayer was quick paced and competitive. Then came along modern warfare 2 which used the formula of the first game , butCall of duty is a franchise that has always been close to my heart. And within the franchise I have always enjoyed the infinity ward games, modern warfare was fresh, fun and overall a new experience given the many world war themed games we were used to playing. The multiplayer was quick paced and competitive. Then came along modern warfare 2 which used the formula of the first game , but made it better, the story was gripping and the developers used the engine to its potential by making a creative campaign gameplay be it climbing cliffs, driving snowmobiles of them, or throwing knives. The game did extremely well because it was a worthy sequel to a great game. When modern warfare 3 was announced I was thinking what would they do next? To be honest, they didn't do anything new, same engine, same characters , aging physics and predictable plot. The story continues where mw2 left off and the makers did a good job of making the campaign exciting. But like many have pointed out, it feels like a dlc. Missing were the creative mode of gameplay, it left me with a stale feeling considering the trailer looked so good. But all the epic parts of the game were included in the trailer, the collapsing buildings, the underwater level the train sequence, other than those cut scenes it was basically going through rooms and shooting people dead. This happens till the very end. I don't think infintiyward's heart and soul were in this game. Knowing they fired 2 senior members of the team, it has taken its toll. Battlefield 3 is superior when it comes to graphics, physics and the fact that the listen to the gamers in further tweaking the game to make it enjoyable. Activision does not do this. They have assumed that the franchise's history will be the selling point of the game. But battlefield 3 has made sure that doesn't happen. The cod fans are not in for a treat with this one but they will not be entirely disappointed.my final verdict is buy the game only if you are itching to know how the story ends or you feel like playing some new cod maps. If you are looking for the next-gen platform in multiplayer war gaming just go with battlefield 3… Expand
  28. jay236
    Nov 9, 2011
    5
    There were a couple things I was actually excited about for the PC version: 1) Dedicated servers, 2) Specialist play style, and 3) Support play style. However, I tried it on my friends Steam account and all three were a let down. Dedicated server lag was definitely better, however there's no incentive to play on those servers because of no ranking...therefore barely anyone to play with. IThere were a couple things I was actually excited about for the PC version: 1) Dedicated servers, 2) Specialist play style, and 3) Support play style. However, I tried it on my friends Steam account and all three were a let down. Dedicated server lag was definitely better, however there's no incentive to play on those servers because of no ranking...therefore barely anyone to play with. I did join a fun gun game server (reminds me of Black Ops), kept me entertained for about an hour.

    Specialist package was fun for a bit in FFA...trying to stay alive then getting all the perks you can't decide on...but in the end I still didn't feel wowed or anything.

    Support package didn't seemed as overpowered as it was lol. Killstreaks have slightly higher requirements but still, play style didn't feel innovative.

    Same Sh!t, Different Title. Keep your money and ignore the super biased "critic" reviews; they're probably paid to give 100% scores. CoD 4 was the only true "Game of the Year."    … Expand
  29. PoonApe
    Nov 9, 2011
    5
    You cant give the game a 0.....but you cant give the game anything more than a 5 either. I question the "professional" reviewers and their integrity by awarding this game so highly. At its best its a map pack for MW2. Only buy this game if you after the exact experience you have had for entire MW series. I actually look back and think that MW1 was superior to this entry. It was excitingYou cant give the game a 0.....but you cant give the game anything more than a 5 either. I question the "professional" reviewers and their integrity by awarding this game so highly. At its best its a map pack for MW2. Only buy this game if you after the exact experience you have had for entire MW series. I actually look back and think that MW1 was superior to this entry. It was exciting and fresh. The maps on this are poorly designed and small. It encourages sub machine gun run and shoot play only. The spawn points are just awful. The only people giving this game high reviews are fan boys who dont understand gaming. I will say its a prefessional package and put together with quality.....but the developers should be good at this by now.....they have done it three times in a row.… Expand
  30. Leather99
    Nov 10, 2011
    5
    This is basically a map pack for MW2. I really regret paying £39 for this pile of junk.. With the previous debacle on lack of dedicated servers I was in two minds whether to buy this or not. Having read the reviews I decided to give it a go and it was a mistake. For starters the graphics and the engine are really starting to show their age. Having also purchased BF3 (no I amThis is basically a map pack for MW2. I really regret paying £39 for this pile of junk.. With the previous debacle on lack of dedicated servers I was in two minds whether to buy this or not. Having read the reviews I decided to give it a go and it was a mistake. For starters the graphics and the engine are really starting to show their age. Having also purchased BF3 (no I am not a fan boy) there is a stark difference in the quality of the graphics that is almost emabarrising. The same applies to the sound.

    Secondly the game just feels like an add on for MW2... the weapons feel the same, the whole package feels very similar. Overall this feels to me like they are milking gamers. With such a high selling franchise why haven't they moved this to a more up to date engine? Having made so much money off of this cash cow surely they are in the best position to do this.

    On the plus side the new awards system is a good idea in that it doesn't just focus on kill streaks... that's about it.

    I really don't understand the mag reviews giving this 90%'s etc...    … 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 »