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. toSTONEiGO
    Jul 16, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. oing beyond "run and gun corridors," "monster-closet AIs" and static worlds, BioShock creates a living, unique and unpredictable FPS experience. After your plane crashes into icy uncharted waters, you discover a rusted bathysphere and descend into Rapture, a city hidden beneath the sea. Constructed as an idealistic society for a hand picked group of scientists, artists and industrialists, the idealism is no… Expand
  2. Xgashh
    Jul 30, 2012
    0
    It's basically same as MW:2... cmon this game is not even worth 10$. It sucks so much that i even dont have words to describe how much it sux. Better buy Batllefield 3, its worth every penny!!
  3. rafs
    Aug 29, 2012
    8
    MW1-MW2-MW3, i liked all the games very much. Though MW1 is the best, others are not so bad at all. We hope the next one will be more attractive than this one.
  4. Speed4Runs
    Dec 18, 2012
    1
    Should I copy and paste the same review as Modern Warfare 2? Well, I try to make it different, but I'll say the same things. This game engine is the same as the CoD 4 Modern Warfare from 2007, nothing has changed, nothing has been optimized. The game is the same as any other post CoD-4 CoD. The gameplay sucks, the singleplayer sucks, the multiplayer sucks, the graphics sucks. The plot isShould I copy and paste the same review as Modern Warfare 2? Well, I try to make it different, but I'll say the same things. This game engine is the same as the CoD 4 Modern Warfare from 2007, nothing has changed, nothing has been optimized. The game is the same as any other post CoD-4 CoD. The gameplay sucks, the singleplayer sucks, the multiplayer sucks, the graphics sucks. The plot is enough good, but not good, since it's not deep and mature. The sound is OK. Avoid these games. There's a CoD every half year (yeah, not even every year, since every 6 months you see a "new", bad, and sad CoD). Sold out games. I do not give this a 0 just because this is not as bad as Call of Duty Black Ops Declassified (45 minutes of SP). CoD MW3 = 0.75, for me.… Expand
  5. LazyDevelopers
    Aug 21, 2015
    1
    Campaign is okay. If I was basing my review on the campaign alone, maybe I'd give a 5/10. it was okay, but not as good as the previous two Modern Warfares. Now for the thing that everyone gets this game for - the multiplayer:

    1. Matchmaking: It's garbage. Rookie players gets matched versus veteran players. Game MVPs are all on one team, while all of those who went negative are on the    Campaign is okay. If I was basing my review on the campaign alone, maybe I'd give a 5/10. it was okay, but not as good as the previous two Modern Warfares. Now for the thing that everyone gets this game for - the multiplayer:

    1. Matchmaking: It's garbage. Rookie players gets matched versus veteran players. Game MVPs are all on one team, while all of those who went negative are on the other. You quit or get kicked from a game, and the matchmaking puts you right back in the same freaking game. It's embarrassing. Oh yeah, also this game puts you into losing games where they LITERALLY JUST ENDED. Not even an exaggeration. You enter a game and the other team had already scored the last kill or are about to. No option to disable this either. And yes, it adds to your losses. Fair, right? You played for ZERO and it counts as a loss for you.

    2. Balance: What balance? Go akimbo SMGs or auto-shotguns and you're set. Very little incentive to use more obscure weapons like 3-burst assault rifles or pistols. Just choose the fastest firing gun, spray and pray, profit.

    3. Hit detection: It's a freaking joke. The game signals (via audio cues) that you shoot a guy 5 times. Or he's completely covered your reticle, you unload an entire magazine into him, yet the killcam shows that zero of those hits made contact. Or the killcam DOES show like 3 bullets hit, yet he's still alive. What the hell is that crap? I swear if even half of the shots registered, my K/D would not be negative right now. Yeah, also, apparently my enemies can shoot through solid texture to get the last bullet in. Not only can they shoot around corners, but apparently only one bullet needs to graze you in order to kill you. Sure,it shows on the killcam it shows he landed like 4 shots, but on YOUR cam, the one that actually matters, you get hit once and die. It's like you just drop dead just because.

    I can understand firing from the hip will be inaccurate. But who in hell programs it so that pointing a sniper rifle right at an enemy and firing at him at POINT BLANK RANGE will miss? What, does the bullet make a 45 degree left turn or something?

    4. Spawn kills: They happen. Not always, but often enough. It's a very frequent occurrence that you spawn RIGHT NEXT to an enemy. Not only that, you can spawn right into the sights of an enemy weapon. I'm not talking about using tactical insertions where you choose where to spawn. I mean "random" spawns where I guess the computer determines where you spawn before you even die. At least in Halo Reach, you spawn guaranteed in a location farthest away from enemies. Nope. Infinity Ward doesn't even do that right. Just spawn randomly and to hell with strategic location. Right in the enemies' sights? Don't care.

    5. Map design: I do not have the DLC maps, so this is only for the default maps. Half are okay, but the other half are just garbage urban maps. The most annoying thing is that there is so much s*** around to impede your movement. There's a can on the ground? You either have to jump over it or walk around it. Can't walk OVER it. Nope. That's just too obvious. Or the developers just randomly tossed crates, debris, and other garbage just to make movement a chore. It's also a common occurrence that you get stuck on a protrusion on a wall. You'd expect that you can just hug the wall nice and easily. But, nope, there's a door frame hanging out from it? You're getting stuck unless you walk away from it. Like really? 5% of your width gets blocked by a small protrusion so your entire body gets hampered? Is it a damn joke?

    6.. Functionality: This is the one thing that you absolutely need to get right when making any game - making sure the game works as intended. That, and being able to play the game (the only thing saving my review from being a zero). There is a "perk" that supposedly makes you invisible to enemy air strikes, drones, etc. Why is it that when I use it, I still see myself as a highlighted target on the enemy POV? Your game must work, IW! YOUR GAME. MUST. WORK!

    Personal gripe: My favourite gun is the Type 95 (in real life known in the West as the QBZ-95). It is reduced to a 3-burst rifle. Using a 3-burst rifle is suicide in this game. Why did they do this? Because it's a Chinese rifle, so they must make it as s*****y as possible?
    This is, what, like the 8th game in the series? How do you make a barely functional game after so many years of experience? How dare you continue to exist as a company and how dare the community continue to support this crummy developer even to today. My only consolation is people are getting tired of the FPS scene and their newest games are only getting average reviews, at least critic-wise    … Expand
  6. TellNoLies
    Nov 8, 2011
    0
    It's not that Call of Duty is necessarily a "bad" game, per se. The mechanics are sound, the gameplay is polished, the graphics are good. The problem is they billed it as "the most anticipated game in history" and then gave us the same exact thing as the previous game. No innovation. Crap story. Rehashed multiplayer. No depth. No thought. The only time this game pushes the envelope is whenIt's not that Call of Duty is necessarily a "bad" game, per se. The mechanics are sound, the gameplay is polished, the graphics are good. The problem is they billed it as "the most anticipated game in history" and then gave us the same exact thing as the previous game. No innovation. Crap story. Rehashed multiplayer. No depth. No thought. The only time this game pushes the envelope is when it attempts to be controversial, in what are CLEARLY cheap attempts to grab media headlines - they understand that any attention is good attention in the gaming business. At this point, the so-called "critic" reviews are a joke. They may go through and give you a rundown on the game's faults, realize that the game's good points are few and far-between, only to completely reverse direction at the end and say, without any trace of self-awareness, "9/10." Because god forbid they be blacklisted from reviewing the next mega-hit that the company puts out (which, ironically, is a trend that they are helping perpetuate). At this point, we as gamers really need to step up and take notice of bias in our gaming sites. We as gamers need to do a lot of things, actually. Most importantly, we have to stop letting them shove media hype down our throats. Is MW3 ACTUALLY bad enough to warrant the zero I give it? No. In reality, it should be more like a three. But we can't compromise anymore. We can't allow constant headlines on IGN to dictate our purchases. We can't allow companies to sell us generic, shallow crap and get away with it. We can't allow companies to copy (more or less verbatim) previous formats and shove them down our throats. It's time that we, as gamers, finally take a little pride for once in our chosen lifestyle and tell the gaming industry that we're not gonna to take it, no, we ain't gonna take it, we're not gonna take it, anymore. Innovation should be celebrated, not labeled as dangerous and used sparingly. And certainly not completely absent, as it is in Modern Warfare three. So when you're at Wal-Mart, or Gamestop, or where ever, do the industry a favor: Do not buy this game.… Expand
  7. Memorable
    Nov 8, 2011
    0
    I thought of writing a good explanation on why this game is awful; but it's not even worth it. It's just god awful. The critic reviews have given this game good reviews because Activision paid them out. The game is awful.
  8. Trebor_UK
    Nov 10, 2011
    0
    To put it simply. DO NOT BUY THIS GAME. This game is a copy and paste of MW2 - meaning the servere consolitis which came with MW2 has returned in MW3. Infact, the game probably has worse graphics than MW2 aswell. Seriously, do yourself a favour and just avoid this poor excuse of a game. The story is weak too, it's like a cheap rip off a Michael Bay movie....The whole game is a massiveTo put it simply. DO NOT BUY THIS GAME. This game is a copy and paste of MW2 - meaning the servere consolitis which came with MW2 has returned in MW3. Infact, the game probably has worse graphics than MW2 aswell. Seriously, do yourself a favour and just avoid this poor excuse of a game. The story is weak too, it's like a cheap rip off a Michael Bay movie....The whole game is a massive cliche.

    Infinity Ward said they would give us a decent PC port with dedicated servers. They pretty much lied. The MP is terrible. The SP is actually better than the MP, and thats saying something. Overall, poor game. Gameplay for SP and MP is just copy pasted right from MW2. I got bored in the first 3 hours. No variation at all.    … Expand
  9. metacrtcreview
    Aug 14, 2012
    8
    Positives-The addition of new weapons, althought not very many new weapons. The addition of Survival mode. Survival mode contains new content and a new way to play. Survival mode allows you to play the way you want, choose which weapons to use, and choose how to play.
  10. HELLBOUND
    Nov 8, 2011
    4
    Ok, so based off the game as if it were the first time we've ever seen this...

    3 single player 3 multiplayer 3 graphics 1 yes it's replayable Overall = 10 Now, lets break it down some The single player, while giving twists and turns and some iconic visuals, doesn't expand on what the series has already created. The campaign is shorter, and it seems to feel even more linear    Ok, so based off the game as if it were the first time we've ever seen this...

    3 single player
    3 multiplayer
    3 graphics
    1 yes it's replayable
    Overall = 10

    Now, lets break it down some

    The single player, while giving twists and turns and some iconic visuals, doesn't expand on what the series has already created. The campaign is shorter, and it seems to feel even more linear than the rest of the COD series.
    -2

    The multiplayer, while enjoyable to those who love the run and gun, no holds bared, everyman for himself gameplay aspect of mw3, it lacks any type of change. It feels more like an expansion on mw2 with new weapons, playstyles and perks. Honestly, these 3 things are the only reason why you can even consider it a new game. During mw1 and 2 and even with World At War, the fun and gun play style was rather enjoyable, but it seems that activision decided to narrow their play base to the pure close quarters players because the mutliplayer maps seem to have gotten much smaller than they already were, almost completely eliminating snipping as a viable option. The lack of bullet physics such as drop lead off mean that it's still possible to snip, but you'll have to have very fast reflexes and a close quarters site.
    The aspect of "he with the fastest internet connection, trigger finger, gun, and lowest recoil (which isn't a huge issue this close quartered) reign supreme.
    Unlike BF3, which seems to have ever more influenced players to work as a team, mw3 seems to have pushed players to even work less as a team.
    Even with the newest, and most enjoyable playstyle, kill confirmed, it's still a mad scramble to out do everyone else.
    You'll find yourself letting someone else go first just so he'll get killed and you can make points off retrieving his dog tags, then you'll race to pick up the dog tags that another teammate gunned down, again, so you'll get the points. While it cuts down on the amount of camping, that's only because you're trying to scramble around and collect more dog tags than anyone else. Dog tags equal points, points equal ranks. Once everyone is ranked up, then expect much more camping. While watching the review on game trailers, you'll see that even they have noticed the best way to get kills is to use a set of tags as bait. (I.E. camping). While again, the multiplayer would have been good had it been something new and interesting, it's nothing more than mw3 with a couple new weapons, gadgets, perks, and maps. Not to mention the extremely overpowering kill perks.
    -2

    The graphics of the campaign do seem to stretch the capabilities beyond what other cod's have, it's only because they cram more into the field of view. Take away an explosion here and there(cause there's a lot of them) and you'll begin to realize that the grpahics are exactly the same as they were before, but perhaps with a little better fps. The graphics in the multiplayer seems to have taken a twist similar to what bf bad company 1 and 2 had. While the cod series used to be good at exstending the awesome graphics into the multiplayer, giving it a look and feel that somewhat surpassed the competition of battlefield multiplayer, they seem to have taken a step in the wrong direction. The graphics in multiplayer seem to have been dumbed down compared to the single player, and they seem to have cut back on coloring and gone more with grey coloring and darker tones, perhaps to give it a more gritty feel. Well, it is more gritty just not in a good way. It actually takes away from the serealism that you got from other cods. Overall, while the graphics are pretty, they're either nothing new, or a step back.
    -2

    For those of you wondering. Is it still replayable? Yes it is, but it would have been a lot easier to enjoy had they just placed it as a stand alone expansion to mw2 and perhaps sold it for around 30 bucks or less as compared to the 60 they're getting just for putting a 3 on it.

    Little more in depth, while I personally am a battlefield fan, it's only because I've been with battlefield since 1942.(pun for those bf fans). However, I enjoyed the cod series quite a bit, and even more so than the battlefield series until the release of black ops(which i traded in my copy cause i broke my copy of bad company 2).
    I figured I would give mw3 a try. While It's not a bad game and can be somewhat enjoyable if you're 100% into that "one man on top" gameplay style, then you'll enjoy it, however, I don't feel you'll think it's worth 60 bucks either. Personally, I'm trading it in and putting the money down on Skyrim, but until then, I'll grind out as much Battlefield 3 as possible.
    Sorry it didn't work out for you Activision.

    Single player 1
    Multiplayer 1
    Graphics 1
    replayable 1

    OVERALL = 4    … Expand
  11. darkfury23
    Nov 8, 2011
    0
    Can't even tell the difference between this and original modern warfare. There's a reason they come out with so many games and so many map packs...its because they want one thing, and it looks like an "S" with a vertical line through it.
  12. Whiskey990
    Nov 8, 2011
    1
    I give it a one for being a good game...several years ago!! Somehow they managed to make the graphics worse than Black Ops, AND MW2!!!! What the heck happened?!? Had they made the graphics impressive, that alone would have at least eased my pain. But no...we simply have a couple old tricks such as an aa12 shotgun, CounterStrike riot shield, and an EMP grenade as if it was some big freakin'I give it a one for being a good game...several years ago!! Somehow they managed to make the graphics worse than Black Ops, AND MW2!!!! What the heck happened?!? Had they made the graphics impressive, that alone would have at least eased my pain. But no...we simply have a couple old tricks such as an aa12 shotgun, CounterStrike riot shield, and an EMP grenade as if it was some big freakin' deal...IT WAS IN 2142! They didn't even bother to change the majority of in-game sounds, effects, voices, etc... They down-sized just about every map to dinky little squares.... BF3 looks 10x better than this and it handles 64 players! I shouldn't even have to compare this to another game...this should not have happened! Now I WILL NOT purchase the next generation Activision game. Not until hell freezes over and they fix the 14GB mess they had me put onto my computer.… Expand
  13. sebastimau
    Nov 8, 2011
    1
    The game offers little innovation overall, both the singleplayer and multiplayer dont offer anything new. The overall balance of multiplayer matches did not hit the spot, like mw 1. I regret ever spending 60 dollars on this game. Although unlikely i hope activition offers a ****ton FREE maps or atleast some interesting multiplayer modes.
  14. NotGunnaLie
    Nov 8, 2011
    0
    I'm not gunna lie, this game is highly disappointing. Also, I've noticed a trend in all the cod reviews. It's basically paid critics vs user reviewers. Obviously the paid ones are going to give the game a much higher score even though it's **** and the users are going to give the game the score it deserves.
  15. BrOkEn_SileNcE
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Fail of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 [PC version]

    This is the worst COD ever.. I've bought and played all Cod games since COD 2.. Cod 2 it was good, Cod 4 it was even better (because I like modern fps), cod 5.. it was good.. Cod: Mw2, it was ok for the time, COD: BO it was better than mw2, but I also didn't like many stuff.. COD: MW3 itâ
  16. daarthreview1
    Nov 8, 2011
    0
    I had the luck to play on every console and pc they all blow.but on pc it was so cheaply ported that its disgusting. does anyone care about pc gamers anymore? well infinity ward does not. call of duty doesn't deserve the crown of fps shooters. look at all the amazing fps shooters out their they might not me amazing
    but they put effort in their games. this games needs to grow up and face    I had the luck to play on every console and pc they all blow.but on pc it was so cheaply ported that its disgusting. does anyone care about pc gamers anymore? well infinity ward does not. call of duty doesn't deserve the crown of fps shooters. look at all the amazing fps shooters out their they might not me amazing
    but they put effort in their games. this games needs to grow up and face reality that they will not be the highest grossing fps title if they keep this up.    … Expand
  17. xSociety
    Nov 8, 2011
    0
    Wow, this game is the same thing, over and over again. MP offers zero competition. 10 year old kids might enjoy this game, but other than that? Steer clear.
  18. CravenKnight
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    First off, I am absolutely OUTRAGED that EA have decided to sell this MW2 Map Pack for $59.99! This release clearly demonstrates that NO progress has been made since the release of COD4: Modern Warfare. The same recycled gameplay for both Single & Multiplayer, the usual cliche story line and the same exhausted game engine. This game is bland to say the least, it lacks any flavor at allFirst off, I am absolutely OUTRAGED that EA have decided to sell this MW2 Map Pack for $59.99! This release clearly demonstrates that NO progress has been made since the release of COD4: Modern Warfare. The same recycled gameplay for both Single & Multiplayer, the usual cliche story line and the same exhausted game engine. This game is bland to say the least, it lacks any flavor at all and this just proves that FPS gameplay has collectively hit a great and impenetrable wall.… Expand
  19. reasonableram
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Single Player is short and mediocre. Multiplayer just fells different in a very bad way. In every other CoD when I would die in Multiplayer I would feel like I made my own mistake, but in this game, it just feels like the game rips you off at least 75% of the time. Spawning blows too.
  20. 12ealDeal
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Terrible Terrible Terrible Terrible. Need I say more? This is a 59.99 map pack for MW2 with some bonus campaign content, an over hyped online add on, and garbage multiplayer maps.
  21. Objectivism
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    The only positive thing I have to say about this game is that it runs smoothly. Beyond that I feel as if I just paid 60 dollars for an expansion pack of rehashed content on new maps. The campaign is exactly what you'd expect from a cod game, completely linear with something crazy happening every 5 minutes to keep this ADD generations attention. Multiplayer removes wager matches and bringsThe only positive thing I have to say about this game is that it runs smoothly. Beyond that I feel as if I just paid 60 dollars for an expansion pack of rehashed content on new maps. The campaign is exactly what you'd expect from a cod game, completely linear with something crazy happening every 5 minutes to keep this ADD generations attention. Multiplayer removes wager matches and brings nothing new to the table. I think people need to avoid the next COD entry as a way of telling them it's time to innovate. I was a huge fan of the original COD and COD2 but am finally losing interest as they're going downhill due to their belief that they can sell the same rehashed game ever year and no one will ever get bored.… Expand
  22. johnweythek
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Poopy. sp is short, it's a mix of shooting gallery scenes and uncontrollable in-game cinematics that took me the short side of an afternoon to play ALL the way through 1st time. Graphics are on par with cod4. And that's maxed out on a PC. MP is ruined by IWNET again. I hope activision doesn't pay you again. Your fault for developing that crappy game. LOVING all the zeros on this board. aPoopy. sp is short, it's a mix of shooting gallery scenes and uncontrollable in-game cinematics that took me the short side of an afternoon to play ALL the way through 1st time. Graphics are on par with cod4. And that's maxed out on a PC. MP is ruined by IWNET again. I hope activision doesn't pay you again. Your fault for developing that crappy game. LOVING all the zeros on this board. a 1.5/10 is too high though. They've made their money though sadly. I'm all about mw and usually a bf hater. But everyone go get bf3 instead. and if you want mw, get the 1st one cause it's the best. pretty soon i'm gonna immerse myself in a REAL game for months and not have to think about this crap anymore. Bring on skyrim!… Expand
  23. metaphase
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Terrible Terrible rehash of the same game they've released over and over again. Bad graphics, bad gameplay (well, bad now because there's nothing new or exciting, if I wanted this I would have played MW1), bad sound (in comparison to current new releases). Just bad all around. Plus the fact that it costs more than other A list titles... I'm sorry but stay well away from this one.
  24. disappointed
    Nov 15, 2011
    1
    Wtf with the guys that gives mw3 a good score??!! Are u guys being payed by activision?
    The game sucks! Period! 1. Short SP
    2. Graphics (dont get me started about that) 3. No new features (just the same **** on a different day) 4. Its a Mappack for MW2 5. MP maps are horrible set 6. They got billions of dollars and came with the same engine as mw1! Was a huge huge fan of COD but    Wtf with the guys that gives mw3 a good score??!! Are u guys being payed by activision?
    The game sucks! Period! 1. Short SP
    2. Graphics (dont get me started about that)
    3. No new features (just the same **** on a different day)
    4. Its a Mappack for MW2
    5. MP maps are horrible set
    6. They got billions of dollars and came with the same engine as mw1!
    Was a huge huge fan of COD but now........ Nuff said!    … Expand
  25. CPLRussell
    Nov 16, 2011
    3
    Single player Gameplay was fun, but PAINFULLY short. Really ?! I can't believe it was done so quickly. Decent engine, but could be better graphics, I could overlook the graphics if the gameplay was better or longer, but really just not worth the money. Dedicated servers not ranked, and unlike Black Ops, only one type of server. How to fix the game so I don't feel ripped off.. 1) MORESingle player Gameplay was fun, but PAINFULLY short. Really ?! I can't believe it was done so quickly. Decent engine, but could be better graphics, I could overlook the graphics if the gameplay was better or longer, but really just not worth the money. Dedicated servers not ranked, and unlike Black Ops, only one type of server. How to fix the game so I don't feel ripped off.. 1) MORE single player content, double it - way too fast of a play for the money 2) balance the weapons. 3) more creative and larger maps Overall not horrible, but not worth the money. at this point it will be my last COD purchase unless it is drastically improved… Expand
  26. Sorky
    Dec 25, 2011
    7
    I really enjoyed the single player campaign in MW3. It kept my attention and offered enough challenge to want to play it to the finish. I thought it was a great ending to the Modern Warfare trilogy. Some say the graphics are outdated, but if it works, then don't try to fix it. The mulitplayer is another story. I play it, but it's not my favorite. I prefer Battlefield 3 and COD BlackI really enjoyed the single player campaign in MW3. It kept my attention and offered enough challenge to want to play it to the finish. I thought it was a great ending to the Modern Warfare trilogy. Some say the graphics are outdated, but if it works, then don't try to fix it. The mulitplayer is another story. I play it, but it's not my favorite. I prefer Battlefield 3 and COD Black Ops multi over MW2 and 3. The Co-op Survival and Resistance is innovative and fun.… Expand
  27. Coeco
    Jul 19, 2012
    0
    This used to be a really enjoyable shooter series. Now the only remotely use it has left for sane individuals is a reminder on what marketing does to the quality of games thanks to greedy publishers. Way to go Activision. I can only truly hope that you people will never figure out how to repopulate.
  28. CsendesMark
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    The game was awful, full of cliche. The boring save the USA/Western civilization stuff.
    The Story line is even worse than a world war simulation on youtube.
    The gameplay is okay, but getting bored with QTEs. And it's getting old, this game not added anything new to the Call of Duty legacy....
  29. Ragna
    Nov 14, 2011
    0
    In this game youâ
  30. checkeredhat09
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    What isn't wrong with this game? Everything everyone is saying is true. The campaign is short, the graphics are terrible, and overall it just seems like a poorly done console port. On budget cards that are able to run Crysis 2 on medium to high butter smooth, this game stutters like the kid from billy madison, and all the while the textures look like something from 2004. Especially theWhat isn't wrong with this game? Everything everyone is saying is true. The campaign is short, the graphics are terrible, and overall it just seems like a poorly done console port. On budget cards that are able to run Crysis 2 on medium to high butter smooth, this game stutters like the kid from billy madison, and all the while the textures look like something from 2004. Especially the foliage! God the jagged foliage!

    Honestly the only thing that was good about this game was the story. Honestly it was like watching a movie, with some gameplay sprinkled in. Over the top and ridiculous, but amusing for me at least.    … 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 »