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. Loque_k
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    I refuse to pay Activision any money after announcing the removal of dedicated servers from MW2. I also find it insulting that they tell us it was by community request to remove them - it was clear from this point that MW1, a great game, was being rinsed for profit. MW3 is just further proof of this - buying it is only showing that you want Activision to do it more.
  2. thenthomwaslike
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    Modern Warfare 3 tries soooo hard to refine its gameplay experience by combining aspects from black ops and mw2 and ends up creating an even more ridiculous, completely unbalanced, unrealistic, unimpressive ctrl-c, ctrl-v. character animations have been stagnant since modern warfare 1, gun models look like plastic toys, the sense of scope is tiny, and the fact that they actually ask gamersModern Warfare 3 tries soooo hard to refine its gameplay experience by combining aspects from black ops and mw2 and ends up creating an even more ridiculous, completely unbalanced, unrealistic, unimpressive ctrl-c, ctrl-v. character animations have been stagnant since modern warfare 1, gun models look like plastic toys, the sense of scope is tiny, and the fact that they actually ask gamers to pay 60 dollars for this is absurd. then on top of that they throw in this "premium service" called call of duty elite. its a stat tracker with some clan management and a discount for their crap map packs that they release monthly. that is 50 dollars a year. they have taken what was once a great series stripped it of its roots and used it as a cash cow. mw1 great, mw2 mediocre, blops horrible. mw3 for 110 dollars? an abortion.… Expand
  3. xmtalley
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Modern Warfare 3 is the same old crap that has been spoon fed to us with a re-branded title, some new maps, modes, and guns. At the very least you could have put some new weapon sounds instead of re-using the same old **** Old engine is old, nuff said. Infinity Ward thinks they can give us dedicated servers back instead of that god awful IWNET **** and think we will be happy, but PCModern Warfare 3 is the same old crap that has been spoon fed to us with a re-branded title, some new maps, modes, and guns. At the very least you could have put some new weapon sounds instead of re-using the same old **** Old engine is old, nuff said. Infinity Ward thinks they can give us dedicated servers back instead of that god awful IWNET **** and think we will be happy, but PC players hold grudges, forever. /fail game #BF3WINS… Expand
  4. memzer
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    DO NOT BUY THIS IF YOU PLAY FROM AUSTRALIA.

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

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

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

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

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

    Giving the game a 2/10 for the single player campaign only. I cannot stress enough, if you are in Australia save your $99 and buy a different game.    … Expand
  5. prmaguiar
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Let me start by stating I am NOT a Battlefield fanboy. In fact, I couldn't care less for BF3 as of now, since I'm one of the thousands of Steam users boycotting EA's Origin. And I didn't enjoy Bad Company 2 either. That said, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is a bad game in almost every aspect. I don't much care for the dated graphics: they still look rather acceptable and make for a smoothLet me start by stating I am NOT a Battlefield fanboy. In fact, I couldn't care less for BF3 as of now, since I'm one of the thousands of Steam users boycotting EA's Origin. And I didn't enjoy Bad Company 2 either. That said, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is a bad game in almost every aspect. I don't much care for the dated graphics: they still look rather acceptable and make for a smooth experience on my also dated rig. Now to tthe actual game modes. The campaign manages to be shorter than MW2's (which is to say, it's REALLY short). If only it had a nice story like its predecessors, though, it would be a good campaign. It doesn't, and you get bored despite the epic scale the war raging around you has reached. It's all been done before, some missions are almost carbon copies of MW and MW2 ones. It's cliche-ridden, full of predictable "scenes" where your character barely survives (you get knocked down with a scripted explosion, some NPC helps you up, the camera tilts as if to show you're dizzy, then you're fully recovered and back on the frontlines). There are no real plot twists or anything memorable in this campaign whatsoever. I played on "veteran" difficulty and felt the AI was pretty good though. But it is in no way an actual challenge. Now for the multiplayer mode... this deserves a little background. When I bought MW2 upon launch, I hadn't read any previews about it. I just bought it because I was still hyped from COD4, which had an amazing campaign and awesome multiplayer. So I had no clue MW2 wouldn't be getting dedicated servers. I was in for a MAJOR disappointment. I was like "MATCHMAKING??? REALLY???" But the worst thing was, maps were terrible, felt like carousels with annoying players (a maximum 18 of them, to be precise) running around with no tactics or teamwork at all. TERRIBLE stuff. I only managed to endure a couple hours of it, and vowed never to buy a MW game again. But then it was announced MW3 would be getting dedicated servers again. Being fond of the campaign storyline as I was, and hoping the multiplayer would go back to what it was in 2007, I immediately broke my word and pre-purchased it. Then, just a few days before launch day, I read an article at GameSpy saying dedicated servers wouldn't be ranked (meaning you can't level up or unlock guns, items, etc on them) and once again, the player limit would be 18, which is utter garbage. If COD4 had 32 players (some DEDICATED servers allowed even more somehow), why can't we have those 4 years later? Maps also look and feel terrible. MW3's multiplayer is a BORING and frustrating experience. I cannot even understand how this game appeals so much to the masses. It's not entertaining at all. Also, with no leaning AGAIN, gameplay is horrible. Bottom line (multiplayer-wise) is, MW3 = MW2 with even worse maps. The only thing remotely good about this game is the Spec Ops mode, which doesn't even come close to making MW3 worth the 60 bucks I spent on it. This game should cost 10 USD, tops. No joke. I'll tell you what IS a joke though. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3.… Expand
  6. KJK
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    A játék ismét ugyan azt nyújtja mint a MW2 csak lecserélték a pályákat és skineket a Single player meg szokott cod-os hangulat mész 1 kis ösvényen és lövöd az ellenségeket akikA játék ismét ugyan azt nyújtja mint a MW2 csak lecserélték a pályákat és skineket a Single player meg szokott cod-os hangulat mész 1 kis ösvényen és lövöd az ellenségeket akik csak úgy Ņ Expand
  7. d0n
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    This game is MW2 re-skinned, all of the "Critics" reviews are nonsense, bought the game and the graphics are absolutely HORRIBLE for today's gaming standards, so is the animation and the sound (like tin cans tied to a car being dragged across the street).

    Starting the game for the first time it asked me to readjust my graphics since last I ran MW2! never had MW2 installed before,    This game is MW2 re-skinned, all of the "Critics" reviews are nonsense, bought the game and the graphics are absolutely HORRIBLE for today's gaming standards, so is the animation and the sound (like tin cans tied to a car being dragged across the street).

    Starting the game for the first time it asked me to readjust my graphics since last I ran MW2! never had MW2 installed before, WTF?!?!?, you may think I am lying but look at this picture http://imgur.com/Cgb80 and laugh with me.

    This game is hype and just that, big fat ZERO for you, I would have given it 5 if that picture would have not added more insult to the injury.    … Expand
  8. Cal
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    It is a shame this score system doesn't go into the minuses. This game is terrible, it is basically no more than an extremely expensive DLC pack to the last game, which in itself was an extremely expensive DLC pack to the original. Save your money for something worth buying.
  9. slakmoh
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Garbage.. Same thing every year, let's just keep gobbling it up, k? Don't worry we'll keep buying it bc our brains aren't numb enough yet. Here's hoping that they at least make a new graphics engine one of these years.
  10. Wally79
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Short and boring shooting gallery of a campaign. No lessons learned from competitors where no wall or building is safe. Only minor tweaks from previous game in the series, nothing new (maybe a gun or two). Recycled and way overpriced as a full game, would have been better if it had been a $10 dlc instead.
  11. Lorheim
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    As expected this is just a copy from the last game with no real improvements to the Multiplayer. Singleplayer has some new stuff but if that were the game alone no one would buy it anyway. Seriously, let's get behind the FPS craze please.
  12. TECSmith
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    As an avid follower of this shooter I collected all but 'Black-Ops' on the PC.

    I will conclude my 'Call of Duty' collection with this title, and really hope that this is the last we see of the series, as it appears a lot of loose ends were tied up from the previous 'Modern Warfare' games. Whilst I did enjoy the single-player and special operations mode, I realize there is very little in    As an avid follower of this shooter I collected all but 'Black-Ops' on the PC.

    I will conclude my 'Call of Duty' collection with this title, and really hope that this is the last we see of the series, as it appears a lot of loose ends were tied up from the previous 'Modern Warfare' games.

    Whilst I did enjoy the single-player and special operations mode, I realize there is very little in the way of any major game engine changes - a few sparkles here and there.
    I didn't expect much, and really was only keen on seeing how it all ended in the storyline... Yes, the gameplay could have been a bit longer though!

    Overall, there were some good story telling ideas and strong character backgrounds. But in my opinion Activision should now look toward building a new franchise for 2012.
    Thank you and goodnight!    … Expand
  13. snipegunner
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    5 hour campaigns, shortest in modern gaming history and of all the CODs. The sounds, animations, even voice actors for most of the sounds for kill streaks are a straight copy paste from MW2 and COD4.
  14. DethDevice
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Another year another CoD. Except this time the story isn't as good (which was one of MW2's best points) and the multiplayer feels the meh. I really loved making my emblems in Black Ops, and its disappointing to this feature not there.
  15. user
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    ACTIVISION, this is 8 years old game and you sell us like new one, why don't you invest in new engine with realistic shooting and beautiful graphics , mw3 is for 5 years old kids, what is the point with the stupid perks where is the realistic there, cm on people wake up
  16. Emtu
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Ultra recycled, how is this worth $60? Nothing new or interesting, what a load of crap. Multiplayer is a joke, the community is garbage and the graphics are worse than MW2. Seriously stay away.
  17. black0ut
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    This game is so overrated. Most of us played this in 2007 and they are selling the same 4 years ago and everyone buys it. The campaign is worse than the BF3 has (I liked BF3 singleplayer more). The story is like: us 3 ubersoldiers can win the WW3 without any problems. Its so unrealistic. I dont mean that water guns have more recoil than the ones in MW3 but the action is so absurd. Ofc BF3This game is so overrated. Most of us played this in 2007 and they are selling the same 4 years ago and everyone buys it. The campaign is worse than the BF3 has (I liked BF3 singleplayer more). The story is like: us 3 ubersoldiers can win the WW3 without any problems. Its so unrealistic. I dont mean that water guns have more recoil than the ones in MW3 but the action is so absurd. Ofc BF3 isnt real at all but at least less unreal than the MW3. Only improvement I saw (heard) is sounds. I dont blame graphic even that graphics. Even the menu is kept same.I dont like this game at all.… Expand
  18. spartan1123
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    The map design in multiplayer is worse than MW2 and arguably Black Ops, the game has devolved over it's 3 releases into charging around corners pre-firing SMGs or duel automatic pistols to win, the only changes from MW2 are really the new Support killstreak, other than that there is little to no innovation present in the mulitplayer, the single player is another tiresomely over the topThe map design in multiplayer is worse than MW2 and arguably Black Ops, the game has devolved over it's 3 releases into charging around corners pre-firing SMGs or duel automatic pistols to win, the only changes from MW2 are really the new Support killstreak, other than that there is little to no innovation present in the mulitplayer, the single player is another tiresomely over the top explosion fest where you are either on a mounted gun, in a car you're not driving or being dragged around by a guy with "follow" over their head.
    It's just 'another call of duty' and nother more.    … Expand
  19. zenirum
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    Rehashed singleplayer. Rehashed multiplayer. Priced mappacks, God forbid they release a SDK so users would actually improve this game more than the devs ever could. 1/10, feeling generous today.
  20. Colonel69
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    On nous prend pour des imbéciles ou de simple vache à lait.MW3 est un copié collé de MW2 avec un relooking des armes et des perks.
    Ã
  21. murbz
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    MW3 is basically a map pack for MW2. The graphics are worse than MW2, if not even worse than MW1, there are a few new maps and that's it. Other than that it's a carbon copy of MW1. You would think after lying to the public saying "We spent 1 full year" on this game that it would be better than this. The entire Modern Warfare game line has been derailed since MW2, but I wasn't sure if theyMW3 is basically a map pack for MW2. The graphics are worse than MW2, if not even worse than MW1, there are a few new maps and that's it. Other than that it's a carbon copy of MW1. You would think after lying to the public saying "We spent 1 full year" on this game that it would be better than this. The entire Modern Warfare game line has been derailed since MW2, but I wasn't sure if they could screw this series every further.

    I haven't played a CoD game since MW2, and I don't plan on playing another one ever again. It's clear that the publishers/dev's don't care about the public, they don't listen to the public and they just want their money. At least give the game new features... From what I can see the only redeemable quality of MW3 is how you can edit your private game mods, rules etc... yet you cant gain XP on it, so it defeats the purpose.

    The upsides to this game are minimal at best. I had a look a few things;

    - Graphics
    - Storyline
    - Multiplayer
    - Stackable killstreaks
    - Community
    - Elite

    All of which were disgusting.

    Let's start with the graphics; The graphics are terrible. They obviously don't want to use a different graphic engine, so they just keep recycling the same crap over and over again. With the amount of money the Call of Duty franchise make they could either get people to code them one, or make one themselves. It shows that the company has no desire to change the game in any shape or form, and are only concerned with one thing; the green.

    Onto the singleplayer storyline; The storyline was average at best. It had some ok set-peices, but the storyline is just beefed up by explosions every two seconds. The characters are really average, and you would think after the decline in MW2, they would make some better characters... obviously not.

    Multiplayer; Absolutely disgusting. You would think after the amount of complaining people did about not having dedicated servers in MW2, they would add a simple dedicated server browser... nope... of course not, why would they want to make our gaming experience any good at all? Everything about the online is crap... especially for PC. Xbox/PS3 gamers are used to matchmaking lobbies but PC gamers are not. No point buying this for PC.

    Stackable killstreaks; Terrible idea all together. Should not have been implemented. Way to easy to get good stuff. It's a bad system for new players who aren't that great at this game.

    Community; Absolutely deplorable community. 90% of the community are more concerned about their KD rather than teamwork and unity. They care more about how many kills they get and whether or not they top the leaderboard. You try to get help, you get smashed by all these 13 year old children raging on mic. Not to mention the fact that everybody is hostile 24/7 on CoD...

    Elite; A copy of Battelog. hey you would think that they would make Elite work for PC's... obviously not straight away, that would be too good wouldn't it? People go on about how they say "Battlelog and Battlefield are the same as MW3" when they're completely different all together.

    All up, I give this game a 0/10. There are no redeemable qualities about this game, every time I try to find one, it gets cancelled out by another con. I really wish the publishers/dev's would read these reviews, because nearly all of them are saying the same thing... saying that the game needs work, and needs to STOP being a carbon copy.

    I am a BF3 player, but before you go jumping on the "YOU'RE A BF3 FANBOY AHHAHA **** I went into this game assuming it would be bad, yes, but I gave it a chance. I sat and played it. Played it on multiplayer on PC, Xbox and gave it a chance. I didn't like it so I'm posting a review.

    Also, attention to IGN. I don't understand why the **** you guys are still in business... Oh that's right, you get paid off by every company to talk up their game in pre-release, then as soon as it comes out you talk **** about it... as soon as something get's announced, you then proceed to talk it up again. You pathetic money hungry ****s. I come to Metacritic for my reviews, because they're unbiased people.

    **** IGN and **** Activision.    … Expand
  22. clarky112
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    So another year comes around, and another re-hash of the tired and worn Call Of Duty Series is released. The same old and short campaign of... Run and shoot here... 50 explosions there... everything gets messy... and 90% of the squad you are with ends up dead. Multiplayer brings the same old experience, adding nothing new to the table, with the lackluster maps, and a couple of new perks,So another year comes around, and another re-hash of the tired and worn Call Of Duty Series is released. The same old and short campaign of... Run and shoot here... 50 explosions there... everything gets messy... and 90% of the squad you are with ends up dead. Multiplayer brings the same old experience, adding nothing new to the table, with the lackluster maps, and a couple of new perks, which aren't at all that exciting. As for the look of the game, nothing has changed since, nor does it stand out, which again dampens the experience (especially when comparing to the likes of other newly released games such as Battlefield 3 and Uncharted 3). The only thing remotely enjoyable was the 'reinvented' Spec Op's mode, which is practically only enjoyable whilst playing with a friend. Experiencing the same mode through random joins i found myself to be doing most of the work, with many neglecting the focus of 'teamwork'. Yet as much as this was enjoyable, the mode becomes stale and repetitive (much like the franchise) very quickly. In hindsight, this game rates very poorly compared to other shooters available on the market today (both new and old). The game is stale and bland and short, whilst at the same time highlights the need for change, if the series wishes to survive and compete within future markets.… Expand
  23. Lagransiete
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Seriously?? SERIOUSLY?? THE SAME GAME?? **** this **** I've already played this kinds of game before, I'm not playing a COD game until they offer some NEW mechanics...
  24. TheSecondOne
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Basicly just MW2. No huge improvements and nothing really innovative. Other than of course CoD Elite which fills the pockets of the developers/publishers. Sure it's optional but it is been praised to heaven like it is a technological breakthrough. Most of it already existed in Halo 3. The sound effects of the guns have improved which is nice. But other than that you get what you wouldBasicly just MW2. No huge improvements and nothing really innovative. Other than of course CoD Elite which fills the pockets of the developers/publishers. Sure it's optional but it is been praised to heaven like it is a technological breakthrough. Most of it already existed in Halo 3. The sound effects of the guns have improved which is nice. But other than that you get what you would expect from a Call of Duty game. After just reading that a MW3 developer begs for help to criticize the game with a better review score this game just got a 0 from me. This shows the true nature.… Expand
  25. four100
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Modern Warfare 3 = Modern Warfare 2.1a i mean come on honestly, the graphics are the same textures as mw2, it's not even using dx11. the singleplayer is boring, then again battlefield 3 singleplayer is boring too. but who buys a game mutliplayer fps to play single player? paying 60 dollars for what could have been a dlc is rage inducing. seriously activision, you could have justModern Warfare 3 = Modern Warfare 2.1a i mean come on honestly, the graphics are the same textures as mw2, it's not even using dx11. the singleplayer is boring, then again battlefield 3 singleplayer is boring too. but who buys a game mutliplayer fps to play single player? paying 60 dollars for what could have been a dlc is rage inducing. seriously activision, you could have just bundled up all the maps you have on mw3 and released for mw2 and nobody will be saying that you guys released a piece of crap game.… Expand
  26. SilentHitman
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Absolute rubbish..They recycled buildings/sounds from cod4 and mw2 , the gamejust doesnt feel 'new'. And their biggest mistake is matchmaking for ranked matches.
  27. Kurze
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Take MW2, slightly reskin the guns, mod a few maps, label it MW3 and sell it for $60? Sounds like a plan! Quite why anyone would pay money for this is beyond me.
  28. Destravus
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    I just made an account on Metacritic just to let you guys know how BAD this game is! Its unbelievable that people still actually buy and play this game. My friend is a huuuge CoD fan and he bought it first day it came out. He finished the single player and he said it SUCKED. After he finished the single player he played the online for like 10 hours and it was such a horrible experience forI just made an account on Metacritic just to let you guys know how BAD this game is! Its unbelievable that people still actually buy and play this game. My friend is a huuuge CoD fan and he bought it first day it came out. He finished the single player and he said it SUCKED. After he finished the single player he played the online for like 10 hours and it was such a horrible experience for him that he just didn't want the game anymore.

    I borrowed it from him and I finished the single player and spent some time in the online multiplayer. OH MY GOD what an awful game this is.. Seriously if you want a good online shooter you could better buy Battlefield 3. This **** is the same graphics, engine and game play all over again.

    The only reason I am scoring it a 1 and not a 0 is because the MW3 dev started crying and wanting people to rate this **** game positive on Twitter. It just shows how ignorant and naive those people are. Next time if you want people to give your game a positive ranking, you have to deliver a QUALITY game!    … Expand
  29. Crueltysheir
    Nov 10, 2011
    1
    Once a great PC game series turned into a pile of steaming dog **** for console users.

    Money talks here and as long as they get theres they dont give a rats arse.

    Spec Ops is good fun for aboput 5 hours and thats it.

    Very dissapointing game but what can we expect from these retrards and that ugly peice of **** lisp talking mother **** Bowling go **** your self you ****

    Have fun.
  30. xXMETALxGEARXx
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Literally one of the worst games ever made. I'm wondering how Activision didn't get tired of rehashing the same old content for 3 games now. Even worse, their CEO Bobby Kotick already stated they're working on a new title coming up sometime next year THE SAME DAY MW3 came out. The way I see it he realised what a terrible game MW3 is a bit too late. For me it's nothing but a "fresh"Literally one of the worst games ever made. I'm wondering how Activision didn't get tired of rehashing the same old content for 3 games now. Even worse, their CEO Bobby Kotick already stated they're working on a new title coming up sometime next year THE SAME DAY MW3 came out. The way I see it he realised what a terrible game MW3 is a bit too late. For me it's nothing but a "fresh" mappack. "Fresh" because they even used the same buildings and structures like in CoD4. In one sentence MW3 is a game with poor writing, generic gameplay and a campaign that lasts for 3 hours. 60$ down the drain I'd say.… 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 »