Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

 PlayStation 3
User Score
3.4

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 5387 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1,362 out of 5387
  2. Mixed: 595 out of 5387
  3. Negative: 3,430 out of 5387
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. G_Mackzy
    Dec 6, 2011
    4
    It's not so much the game but the community that breaks this game. As someone who enjoys heavily team based games like Battlefield etc MW3 offers very little. It seems that the game promotes kill whoring a little too much which leads to players more obsessed with their k/dr than actually winning.
  2. seandewar5
    Jan 14, 2012
    4
    Wow, Call of Duty : Modern Warfare 3, what an anticipated game - made of complete garbage.

    First thing, the pros : - Fast paced multiplayer action which is what made the multiplayer popular. - Very addicting. And now, the cons : - Unbalanced weapons such as the Akimbo FMG9 and the Type 95; still overpowering even after two months of the game's release. - The lack of dedicated servers -    Wow, Call of Duty : Modern Warfare 3, what an anticipated game - made of complete garbage.

    First thing, the pros :
    - Fast paced multiplayer action which is what made the multiplayer popular.
    - Very addicting.

    And now, the cons :
    - Unbalanced weapons such as the Akimbo FMG9 and the Type 95; still overpowering even after two months of the game's release.
    - The lack of dedicated servers - was a disappointment; but I can see their point on the cost (how did Battlefield 3 achieve it, then?)
    - Lag and hit detection problems; yes, it was not as bad as Call of Duty : Black Ops, but still terrible compared to past titles.
    - Short storyline; hell, you may as well buy the game for the multiplayer - but even THAT'S flawed.

    Need I say more? Please do not buy this game, let the series die now, it's made enough mistakes.    … Expand
  3. Skull-o-mania
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    I get it now; I am a sucker to the capitalist machine that is Activision. I would not be surprised if the proceeds for this game are going to the legal team that is being built to attack the creators of the Call of duty franchise Jason West and Vincent Zampella. I am sure that Robert Kotick is rolling in my money right now laughing to himself. But now on to the game am I supposed to be toI get it now; I am a sucker to the capitalist machine that is Activision. I would not be surprised if the proceeds for this game are going to the legal team that is being built to attack the creators of the Call of duty franchise Jason West and Vincent Zampella. I am sure that Robert Kotick is rolling in my money right now laughing to himself. But now on to the game am I supposed to be to amazed by. There is an argument in the gaming world if Battlefeild or Modern Warfare 3 will beat out the other in the long run. From what I have played of both of them; I would like it if a third party came along and destroyed them both. What ever that means I don't know. Graphics: I can't complain. Some very stunning moments, but I did get some strange texture pops.
    Design: The reason I am giving this game a 4 is because at least there are somethings that do work. The twitch gameplay is what we've all come to expect from this developing company. Level Design: Signle player linear and boring. This is ridiculous, I just feel like I am being led by the hand and shown all the same enemy over an over. Multiplayer level Design: Are you kidding me. The release maps are all basic grid based square maps with some objects to provide minimal cover. There is something about all the maps that feel like claustrophobic hallways. Even the "open air" sniping maps seem small and cramped. Why can you not jump up on boxes that are knee height, but dumpster can be mounted easily?
    Controls: Nothing to complain about here. Sound: Nothing to complain about here.

    Conclusion: Next time when the hype is such that a company will spend good money two months before to promote the next "big" game. I will think twice. I think that consumers were thinking that this game was going to be some "new" an "amazing" experience that would keep there hopes up about the business. Unfortunately this game does not seem "new" the aspect of "amazing" seems to be some where in the past successes of this pony. Nostalgia is a good selling point.    … Expand
  4. Mattaclysm
    Nov 21, 2011
    4
    I actually can say I was somewhat interested in MW3 just because of the story. MW2's campaign was actually a good one so I thought the follow up in MW3 would be a decent one. Sadly, this is not the case. MW3's campaign edges on your patience mission by mission following up with one boring step at a time. I had forced myself to play on hoping something exciting would happen. UnfortunatelyI actually can say I was somewhat interested in MW3 just because of the story. MW2's campaign was actually a good one so I thought the follow up in MW3 would be a decent one. Sadly, this is not the case. MW3's campaign edges on your patience mission by mission following up with one boring step at a time. I had forced myself to play on hoping something exciting would happen. Unfortunately it took about half of the time I spent playing before something interesting actually happened, it took me until the level with the sandstorm to not get bored for a while. Then after that. The game once again starts to become less and less interesting. It took me a little under seven hours to complete the campaign on veteran. It might just be a matter of perspective but I thought it was much more fun in MW2 playing as the Rangers as apposed to MW3's DF. The graphics aren't much different then MW2. In fact they're exactly the same. Nothing has improved. You even see some of the same objects that were in MW2. Sounds of guns are okay but I have run into a few situations where the game will mess up and I'll hear a static-ish screeching that will force me to turn my sound all the way down until it stops. Half of the music flat out sucks. It's probably the worst soundtrack of any of the CoD series. You hear the delta force music so much that the mute button on your TV actually becomes useful. On to the multiplayer. In my eyes MW3 is slightly better then the camp fest known as MW2. It's no CoD4 but it's decent. Until the lag hits. Wow this game lags far worse then Black Ops ever did online. This company has made over a billion dollars from the Call of Duty name and they can't get better servers? The constant freezing in games and lag makes this game a joke. Just like Black ops and MW2 a lot of the maps in the game feel like they were designed to suck. This game's online interface has taken a huge step back from where BO was going too. The lack of in depth stat tracking and MW3's terrible theatre, which for some reason doesn't work for me half of the time (Out of Memory.) . I feel like whoever was working on the MP aspect just threw stuff together and called it a day. All in all. This game is below being what could be considered mediocre at best. The campaign blows. Survival should have been 4 players, and the online is really laggy. I seriously hope if there is a MW4 IW gets their crap together because if this is the sign of all things to come it looks like Treyarch is going to be the only one dropping out decent CoD's.… Expand
  5. PS3Man
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    I honestly was expecting more. I loved Black Ops and thought it was the best CoD yet. I was hoping that Infinity Ward would build on what Black Ops had alreadt accomplished. Instead, Infinity Ward decided to only expand on MW2. MW2 is a two year old game and is dated. Black Ops is new and full of amazing features such as dolphin diving, wager matches, cod points, etc. IW disregardedI honestly was expecting more. I loved Black Ops and thought it was the best CoD yet. I was hoping that Infinity Ward would build on what Black Ops had alreadt accomplished. Instead, Infinity Ward decided to only expand on MW2. MW2 is a two year old game and is dated. Black Ops is new and full of amazing features such as dolphin diving, wager matches, cod points, etc. IW disregarded everything that Treyarch did right and only wanted to improve their game. The maps are to small and it seems as though there is too much going on at once. I have already started to go back to Black Ops instead of playing MW3. This game also has some positives though. The connection for multiplayer is greatly increased and is great. Overall, this is more of a Modern Warfare 2.5 than a Modern Warfare 3. This is not the change that I wanted and I believe that IW only put in minimal work into this game. I am a huge fan of CoD, but this is not what I wanted.… Expand
  6. billybloke
    Nov 8, 2011
    4
    Oh dear, what can I say? Anyone expecting an improvement on MW2 will be sorely disappointed. Infinity Ward know exactly who their target audience is and this game panders to the teenage gamer with barely a thought for anyone else. They clearly realised that young players who will hassle mum and dad for expansion packs and add-ons are the ones to appeal to. To all other gamers, haveOh dear, what can I say? Anyone expecting an improvement on MW2 will be sorely disappointed. Infinity Ward know exactly who their target audience is and this game panders to the teenage gamer with barely a thought for anyone else. They clearly realised that young players who will hassle mum and dad for expansion packs and add-ons are the ones to appeal to. To all other gamers, have "Support" so you can still get killstreaks when the kiddies kill you. Snipers Rifles have no value whatsoever, unless you're an expert 'quik-scoper' as no map allows you the time, space or pace to establish a sniping position. This game is frenetic, chaotic and wholly sub-standard. Like an arcade game, except you don't put coins in a machine, you simply drain your parents' credit card. Simples. A shocking addition to the series. If you're a serious fps gamer looking for a mature warfare game with a brain and a strategic element, then Battlefield 3 is for you. If you want to tear around a map at light speed, judged only on your reflexes, then look no further. This shoddy mess will be right up your street.… Expand
  7. Morzy
    Nov 12, 2011
    4
    It's only after playing this you realise how good Black Ops and BF3 really are. Very disappointed but not shocked i must say. Not a single player review, though not really a single player game is it? Quickscoping is back, shoot a guy a few times for him to kill you instantly with his shotgun is back, umpteen helicopters in the air at any time, massive knife lunges, two year old graphicsIt's only after playing this you realise how good Black Ops and BF3 really are. Very disappointed but not shocked i must say. Not a single player review, though not really a single player game is it? Quickscoping is back, shoot a guy a few times for him to kill you instantly with his shotgun is back, umpteen helicopters in the air at any time, massive knife lunges, two year old graphics and the maps (bar a few) are crap. They have cashed in at our expense something terrible here and i think a lot of people will buy Elite before realising how average this game is, hang your heads I Ward. Treyarch got so many things right (credit to them), wager matches, gun game and just generally more balanced gameplay where you felt you actually earned your killstreaks. I bought this game for £25 and traded it in for £35, strangely i still feel ripped off.… Expand
  8. Webwolf
    Nov 21, 2011
    4
    I have been playing COD since MW1, but i am getting tired of this. it feels the same as MW2, but not in a good way. I got fast bored with this game, its a disappointment.
  9. BemaniAK
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    Single Player is short and uninteresting.
    Multiplayer is the same old deal, same old tactic of taking old obscure user-made game modes from old shooters to pretend they did something original, same old MMO-style methods of keeping players addicted to grinding points.
    Playable, but not enjoyable.
  10. Rammsoldat
    Nov 8, 2011
    4
    Ok so call of duty 4 was really good, great plot and nicely done action scenes, modern warfare 2 was essentially the same game but with a new story that got a bit silly. Modern warfare 3 continues on along the same line and while the story is alright its so samey i just dont feel anything from it anymore. every section has been done before in a previous game so much so that you can justOk so call of duty 4 was really good, great plot and nicely done action scenes, modern warfare 2 was essentially the same game but with a new story that got a bit silly. Modern warfare 3 continues on along the same line and while the story is alright its so samey i just dont feel anything from it anymore. every section has been done before in a previous game so much so that you can just tell whats going to happen next and thats never any fun, even the final scene of the game is pretty much exactly like the ones in Mw1 and 2.

    Multiplayer looks to be the usual affair, nothing to see here. This game really isnt worth paying for if you have any of the previous call of duty games.

    Gamers like change in their games but its hard to do it right, change too much or change at the expense of good features and there will be complaints however even worse is when games stay the same. Time to retire modern warfare, the water in the well has become stagnant.    … Expand
  11. Knightwing_J
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    I have bought every COD game since 4, and MW3 is the first time I have been disappointed with the game. Part of that may be my own issue, for having too high of expectations. Part of it may be the hype machine around the game. But I think a lot of it also has to do with the game itself. I buy COD for the multiplayer. I like the single player campaigns, I play them, I enjoy them, but I buyI have bought every COD game since 4, and MW3 is the first time I have been disappointed with the game. Part of that may be my own issue, for having too high of expectations. Part of it may be the hype machine around the game. But I think a lot of it also has to do with the game itself. I buy COD for the multiplayer. I like the single player campaigns, I play them, I enjoy them, but I buy the game for the multiplayer. If the games did not have that component I would not buy them, except maybe in the cheap bins. That being said, the campaign in MW3 is fine... good even. And I had fun playing it. Where the game really falls flat, is in the multiplayer. Specifically, the maps. The maps that are included with the game are terrible, in my opinion. I have no stats to back this up, but in the previous COD games, it seems like the maps were well balanced between interiors and exteriors. I am willing to bet that 80% or more of MW3's maps are exterior/outdoor based. There are a million buildings on the maps... but virtually none of them are accessible. And those that are, are little one or two room structures. In the Wall Street map "Downturn," there is NOTHING beyond a small hallway on the second floor of one of the buildings. On a map that takes place among skyscrapers, you get one hallway on the second floor of one building. This issue is repeated over and over in the game, with many of the maps having buildings that are not accessible, or only accessible is so much as they provide a short hallway to get to the next area of the map. In addition, there are virtually no windows or vantage points on the maps to look out from. In addition, the George Lucas effect seemed to be working its magic on the developers. Virtually every inch of every map is cluttered with... stuff. Barrels, cars, debris, crates, and other random junk. The idea that less is more, was clearly NOT in their minds as they designed these locals. Finally, and in conclusion, the game and the maps for multiplayer seem designed for one style of play, that being "run and gun," which is fine and does not make it a bad game for everyone, but it does make it a bad game for me. The game and maps are not balanced to all types of FPS gamers, especially those like myself that like to take things a little slower and are more methodical. It is disappointing that they took a series that had been really well balanced and shifted it so heavily to one type of gamer. I won't say that I will never buy another COD game again, or anything as hyperbole as that. But I will definitely not blindly pre-order the next COD (and especially the next MW) game as I did with World at War, MW2, Black Ops and MW3. I will wait, maybe see if a friend gets it and try it out before committing to it. And maybe not having a COD game I like this year will give me time to try Battlefield. I did not see the point in buying it since I was getting MW3, but for only $28 to $30 around Thanksgiving, I am willing to give that a try and see if maybe that is a better game for me this year.… Expand
  12. Beahmscream
    Nov 8, 2011
    4
    Now im going to be completely honest here, having gotten the game 3 days early I can tell you one thing. It's simply more of the same. That's not to say the original CoD 4 was bad though, it's just completely over used and now getting to the point where it is ridiculous.
  13. Kaiokhen
    Nov 8, 2011
    4
    Its great how they tune it and made it really smooth and made big improvements. But not worth the $60. This is what MW2 should have been in the first place. For people who plan to buy. Beware that the game is just like MW2 but just redefined and just made improvement. However, you will get bored and start noticing how dull it gets.
  14. Brutane
    Nov 8, 2011
    4
    Multiplayer is busted and that's what you buy it for its just plain BS. Spawning is terrible maps are way too tight you can't see 10 feet in front of yourself. I've never been shot in the back soooo many times.
  15. Genericiz3d
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    Sure, I buy the same laundry detergent to wash my clothes every time. It does what I expect it to do. That doesn't mean I should pay $60 for it, and it certainly doesn't mean I have fun doing the laundry.
  16. MSGR7
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    Okay I would like to try to review this game from both angles as I still believe it deserves positives and negatives. Firstly I have spent quite a few hours really giving this game a go and I have concluded that I don't really like it. There are a number of issues with it so far, although I am sure many of them may be patched soon. Firstly the spawning is atrocious. You literally getOkay I would like to try to review this game from both angles as I still believe it deserves positives and negatives. Firstly I have spent quite a few hours really giving this game a go and I have concluded that I don't really like it. There are a number of issues with it so far, although I am sure many of them may be patched soon. Firstly the spawning is atrocious. You literally get killed and spawn right on the enemies shoulders, meaning you get killed over and over at your spawn. If that doesnt happen you spawn near the battle or right where you were just killed. Yes this happened in Black ops and people complained about the spawn too, but honestly it was so much better than this. At least in Black ops you spawned on one side of the map seperating both teams for a little bit before both teams went back to the battle zones to recommence the battle. Not only this but when using the Microphones to speak the quality is terrible, it was always perfect on Black ops and has always been terrible on both MW2 and now on MW3. It is also taking ages to find games, making me wait 20 minutes to join one, although again this happened with Black ops. The problem with this series is that the gameplay is to fast paced, the enemies are hard to identify, with enemy players disappearing and then reappearing out of nowhere to literally blow you away. Often an enemy magically appears right behind you after getting a few kills. The only way I have gotten my killstreaks so far is by camping a little bit and shooting from range. The maps are clunky and buildings are in odd positions, the maps don't flow properly at all. What happened to COD 4 and Black ops simplicity. They were so easy to store in your memory, for everyone, making gameplay fun. I see a lot of people and hear a lot of people complaining about the above on their mics mid game, so it isnt just me thinking that. Black ops seemed to cater for a broader audience, people who were not good at the game and people who were brilliant. Many of the best scoring MW3 players seem to be taking advantage of glitches within the game to get ahead of everyone else. Black ops is much more fun in that when you are not doing well you can sit back and try sniping for example, as the maps allowed this. It to me required skill to kill opponents where as this game is so fast its a case of luck. I was getting someawesome scores during one match with 40 kills plus on domination, but then followed this up with 30 deaths. It is so inconsistent and unbalanced. I do find the game fun though and recommend it to all COD fans as a temporary title to keep you going until major improvements are made. But don't expect this title to last long. Look at the vast improvement from WAW and Black ops and from COD 4 and MW2. We need new killstreak rewards, new maps, new locations, new guns, new gun sounds, new characters to control. Black ops was a great game because it was set in a different era, utilising different methods of warfare. I believe the Modern warfare franchise needs to end here and Infinity Ward need to develop a brand new series, set during a different time period, with brand new everything. I will however applaud infinity Ward for introducing point streaks, allowing say a player to get two kills and capture a flag and recieve a UAV etc. Also ranking your guns up is a lot of fun. I find myself wanting to play this game the most right now, but I honestly think that once I have given it a good month of gameplay, which I believe is fair, ill be back on Black ops having fun, even if I am not doing too well. To sum this game up and the whole engine in general, there is to much going on for the type of engine being used.… Expand
  17. qwazy
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    I personally play this franchise for the multiplayer aspect solely, and I must say that it's a bit of a let down. The graphics engine looks out of date compared to some of the more recent shooters, including Black Ops (textures, frame rate, smoothing, animation). The flash kills happen far to quickly (usually from one or two bullets in any body part, making or no intense fire fightingI personally play this franchise for the multiplayer aspect solely, and I must say that it's a bit of a let down. The graphics engine looks out of date compared to some of the more recent shooters, including Black Ops (textures, frame rate, smoothing, animation). The flash kills happen far to quickly (usually from one or two bullets in any body part, making or no intense fire fighting found in previous games), poor spawn point drops, and lack of features found in other games is hard to wrap my head around. Did the other games feel like an expansion with more levels, weapons, and moves? Yes. Does this game feel like it actually took more away then it added? Yes. Also, I did pay or COD Elite with high hopes; however, I am disappointed in that also. Honestly, if you knew the game would sell that many copies, with that much hype, and that many pre-orders.... Expect a lot of traffic. Having voice chat constantly cutting out, lobbies drop, spec ops not work past the 1st level online, and Elite itself be down on launch just sours the experience. And please don't say it is a users connection speed, because nothing is worse then having almost 100mb download and 10mb upload, and still have a game choke. This game feels like it should have came out years ago and not holiday 2011. If I could go back and save my $100, I would. With Skyrim on it's way and other excellent titles this year, this game feels over shadowed.… Expand
  18. bobromines77
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    I liked this game when it was called MW2! I am totally disappointed with the lack of change from any of the previous installments. Activision, Sledgehammer Games, and Infinity Ward have applied very little originality to this title. They know that they could package a turd in a case and sell millions of copies based on the name alone. I have been a huge fan of the COD series up to thisI liked this game when it was called MW2! I am totally disappointed with the lack of change from any of the previous installments. Activision, Sledgehammer Games, and Infinity Ward have applied very little originality to this title. They know that they could package a turd in a case and sell millions of copies based on the name alone. I have been a huge fan of the COD series up to this point. To me, it's growing into a Madden style sellout. The multiplayer is full of connection issues and to me, rehashed maps. I am by know means a COD(I own every COD on current generation systems) hater but I can honestly say, "I am glad I also have a copy of Battlefield this year".… Expand
  19. nkohesiv
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    I have to agree with most reviews on here. Just more of the SAME crap year after year. While my wife and I thoroughly enjoy the Kill Confirmed multiplayer mode, and my son and I like the Survival mode, I really do not feel like I am playing a NEW game. I feel like I am just playing some expansion pack of MW2 (which was essentially an expansion pack of MW1). Sure, the new weapons areI have to agree with most reviews on here. Just more of the SAME crap year after year. While my wife and I thoroughly enjoy the Kill Confirmed multiplayer mode, and my son and I like the Survival mode, I really do not feel like I am playing a NEW game. I feel like I am just playing some expansion pack of MW2 (which was essentially an expansion pack of MW1). Sure, the new weapons are nice, but this is really just an overall crap game. The Survival mode is fun, but the fact that it is limited to just 2 players SUCKS! Infinity Ward makes the same crap over and over, and bringing Sledgehammer into the mix did not change ANYTHING! At least Treyarch's Black Ops felt like a completely different game and proper evolution from World at War. I did purchase MW3 and BF3 (have a house full of gamers), but once the newness of MW3 wears off, we will go back to playing Black Ops! Thank you Infinity Ward for pushing the FPS genre forward with MW1, but you SUCK for not contributing anything worthwhile to it since then!… Expand
  20. jackhole88
    Nov 12, 2011
    4
    So many great shooters out there now like Gears of war 3 , killzone 3 , halo and then you have this crap. It's the same crap as before over and over and over. Nothing really new. Activision knows this and will not change because poeple will still buy this crap. Don't waste your money, thier are to many great shooters out there to buy this re-done black ops. Final note : It's real sad whenSo many great shooters out there now like Gears of war 3 , killzone 3 , halo and then you have this crap. It's the same crap as before over and over and over. Nothing really new. Activision knows this and will not change because poeple will still buy this crap. Don't waste your money, thier are to many great shooters out there to buy this re-done black ops. Final note : It's real sad when Activision needs to beg fans to come on this site and post a good review.… Expand
  21. Jonathan-a_100
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    Worth renting, just nothing here that hasn't been done before. Activision simply milking the COD brand for all it is worth. I also bought BF3 this year and i shall be sticking to that series from now on. BF3 multiplayer is so much more rewarding
  22. nschlip
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    Where to start? I have been playing COD since the very first game on PC, and IMO Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is the best COD game in the entire franchise. What happened Infinity Ward? Modern Warfare 3 is the same as Black Ops / Modern Warfare 2....it's just more of the same. This game really could have been released as a $30 expansion (or something like that). I don't really understandWhere to start? I have been playing COD since the very first game on PC, and IMO Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is the best COD game in the entire franchise. What happened Infinity Ward? Modern Warfare 3 is the same as Black Ops / Modern Warfare 2....it's just more of the same. This game really could have been released as a $30 expansion (or something like that). I don't really understand what all the hype is surrounding this game (IMO there are much better ones just released and that are coming out). The single player is poor, multiplayer is more of the same, and SpecOps feels like it was tacked on.....There is just not enough here to justify a $60 game. If it was going for $40, ok....that would change this review a bit. To give Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer Games credit, they did do a remarkable job with the graphics (this is at least a four year old engine), and you can tell they worked extremely hard to deliver this. Bottom line, buy this, yes or no?: No - Save your money and play COD: Modern Warfare if you need your "war" game fix.… Expand
  23. redscorpion33
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    I made sure to buy this game with a debit card so that I couldn't see the money that could have been thrown in the toilet. While this game's campaign isn't the worst thing I've ever played, it left a lot to be desired. The final level was nice, but where was the action through the rest of the game? Black Ops tried and failed to have a story, whereas MW3 barely has a story or keyI made sure to buy this game with a debit card so that I couldn't see the money that could have been thrown in the toilet. While this game's campaign isn't the worst thing I've ever played, it left a lot to be desired. The final level was nice, but where was the action through the rest of the game? Black Ops tried and failed to have a story, whereas MW3 barely has a story or key moments. I can only think of three notable moments in the game, two if I don't count the last minutes. But no one plays Call of Duty for the campaign. I can't believe that I'm about to write this, but here goes; the multiplayer is worse than the campaign. Let that sink in for a second. You can tell that they didn't try too hard with this game by looking at the plain box design, but they made next to no effort for the multiplayer. Weapon leveling is a nice touch, but it's heavily marred by an overabundance of full-auto rifles and crowded maps. Every level that I've played so far has nothing but blown-up cars, alleyways, and more blown-up cars. Does anyone have good memories about Karachi or Rundown on Modern Warfare 2? That is a preview of every level on MW3.
    The campaign is a non-event, Special Ops mode seems better this time around (and anything is better than zombies) but it still isn't very fun, and the multiplayer is drowning in its own flaws. Why don't grenades have explosions more than one foot in MP? Why do shotguns have the range of a rubber band? What is the point of perks if they don't seem to help out that much? And most importantly, why doesn't my trained marine know how to reload a gun without it becoming an eight hour affair? I always equip sleight of hand, but then I am behind because someone might have a "better" perk equipped in that slot. The perks that give you faster aiming and better movement speed while aiming aren't even noticeable. Maybe I need to upgrade them to the pro versions, but why do I have to work that hard for something I all ready worked for?
    In the end, the Professional reviewers have been paid off or are scared to give this game a low score, lest they suffer backlash from fans. Many of the negative reviewers just plain hate CoD or are players of Battlefield 3 (I haven't played BF3, but I'm tired of hearing about the MW3 vs. BF3 debate). I enjoyed Modern Warfare 2's campaign when you controlled the vehicles or did something that was over the top. I still love to play World at War because it takes skill instead of higher levels. I also had fun with Black Ops before they released patches that made my favorite weapons next to useless but still kept the Famas over-powered. I'm saddened by what has happened to the CoDs, and I know this will be the last time they sucker me. It's a money-making machine and Activision has realized this.Someone might argue "maybe it's not easy to make a great game that quickly". Then Activision should wait longer than 355 days to make their next game, or use some of their budget on a script or ask people what they want changed or added. Maybe if it didn't make so much money it could go back to its roots, but until then, I'm done.    … Expand
  24. Driven85
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    I have yet to play the campaign but i feel like the new features were not enough in multiplayer mode. I would even go as far to say its almost a step backwards in some aspects to Black Ops in multiplayer(yes i'm aware infintyward did not touch BlackOps). No AI enemies available in split screen which makes playing more than two people on one console worthless. No one wants jsut a 4 playerI have yet to play the campaign but i feel like the new features were not enough in multiplayer mode. I would even go as far to say its almost a step backwards in some aspects to Black Ops in multiplayer(yes i'm aware infintyward did not touch BlackOps). No AI enemies available in split screen which makes playing more than two people on one console worthless. No one wants jsut a 4 player squirmish. It wouldnt have been so bad if they let you log on with more than one guest, but alas they didnt. Black ops gives you the ability in split screen to do up to 9 AI enemies in a ffa mode or build AI teams in deathmatch. So far i feel like MW3 should of just been DLC content to MW2. I might be a little over critical, but i feel like the series hasn't really evolved that much between the last few titles.… Expand
  25. format
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    SP will be very familiar to players of previous entries in this seris with fighting through similar looking streets against generic personality-free bad guys and the odd vehicle section. no emotional involvement and lots of scene changes don't help the short 6hr campaign. MP is the same as ever with tight small maps - lots of unlocks and new modes that all play the same don't distractSP will be very familiar to players of previous entries in this seris with fighting through similar looking streets against generic personality-free bad guys and the odd vehicle section. no emotional involvement and lots of scene changes don't help the short 6hr campaign. MP is the same as ever with tight small maps - lots of unlocks and new modes that all play the same don't distract from the fact this is almost identical to MW1.

    disappointing and almost insulting how little has changed across 3 games and 4 years of development.    … Expand
  26. HoFT013
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    Activision Blizzard continues to peddle the same exact game year after year. Why fix what's not broken? For the sake of attracting new players to the franchise, that's why.
  27. g_ferrett
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    Let me say this: I'm not complaining about graphics or game play or animation or anything technical like that. It's a well-polished & smooth game and is pretty much what I expected; and still fun.

    I'm just a bit disappointed with the lack of 'smarts' which could have been built into the range of gaming options. Multiplayer is great - always is. Special Ops is great. Single Player is    Let me say this: I'm not complaining about graphics or game play or animation or anything technical like that. It's a well-polished & smooth game and is pretty much what I expected; and still fun.

    I'm just a bit disappointed with the lack of 'smarts' which could have been built into the range of gaming options. Multiplayer is great - always is. Special Ops is great. Single Player is great. But why oh why didn't they include some more tactical features from Black Ops!?

    e.g.1. There's no 'Combat Training' or 'Private / Multiplayer' like in Black Ops - where you just invite a few of your mates and play an on-line level, in an on-line environment, but just against a dozen or so bots. This scenario lends it self so easily to players making their own custom games with their mates - you can take it seriously or stuff around by only playing with pistols for example - just for nothing more than a laugh.

    e.g.2 In the Special Ops - they could have easily extended the number of players to 4 (or 6) where you can invite more than one friend to play Survival mode with. They should have. Again, like Zombie mode in Black Ops. It makes for a very fun night when you just grab a couple of mates & play strategically in the Survival / Wave modes of Special Ops.

    Both of those examples could have added a LOT of flexibility to the times when you don't want to play on-line with (let's face it, you do get them...) idiots abusing each other from around the world. Thus, increasing enjoyment.

    Why they didn't include these as playable options is beyond me. And, a bit of disappointment really at how easy that would have been to implement compared with the rest of the game.

    That's why I'm giving a low score - the game runs very well and has plenty of good features. But it's simply not as versatile at it could and should have been.

    Activision & Infinity Award; if you read this then take note and see if you can add it as an upgrade, or include this in your next MW5....

    And for the record, yes I have half a dozen mates who think the same thing.... so I know I'm not alone in writing this.    … Expand
  28. slyazafox
    Nov 11, 2011
    4
    MW3 is such a let down. The single player is more of the same,an over the top cinematic with fast paced gameplay but it was far to short and easy even on veteran. The multiplayer, which is normally the strong point of the franchise was below poor and seems like a step back from MW2. All the maps are small, seem very similar and look bland and boring and it doesn't have the infinity wardMW3 is such a let down. The single player is more of the same,an over the top cinematic with fast paced gameplay but it was far to short and easy even on veteran. The multiplayer, which is normally the strong point of the franchise was below poor and seems like a step back from MW2. All the maps are small, seem very similar and look bland and boring and it doesn't have the infinity ward feel to it, feels more like a treyarch game. The only aspect of the game worth trying was spec ops survival mode which is fun otherwise the game is just average.… Expand
  29. TheSlickMachine
    Nov 11, 2011
    4
    Infinity ward just released another game widely known as Modern Warfare 3. It is the second sequel to widely popular "Call Of Duty:Modern Warfare. It tells the story after hours of killing General Shepherd, Captain John Price and Nikolai evacuate a dying John "Soap" MacTavish from Site Hotel Bravo, Afghanistan. They reach a safehouse run by Nikolaiâ
  30. Sooch
    Nov 11, 2011
    4
    I used to be such a COD head until this game came out. COD used to always take the cake for me when it came to shooter games but this years edition [MW3] just isn't as exciting. It lacks the "WOW" factor very much and the online issues with lag and servers disconnecting at random moments has made me almost regret the purchase aside from this game just being sort of bland. The campaign modeI used to be such a COD head until this game came out. COD used to always take the cake for me when it came to shooter games but this years edition [MW3] just isn't as exciting. It lacks the "WOW" factor very much and the online issues with lag and servers disconnecting at random moments has made me almost regret the purchase aside from this game just being sort of bland. The campaign mode is top notch but the spec-ops/co-op mode is pretty so-so. Zombie mode is still COD's best co-op mode. The biggest issue I also had with the multiplayer online is that it seems that you die to quickly in comparison to previous COD games. It's almost as if the regular game modes play with hardcore rules and bullets generally deal a lot more damage. I hope they step up on the next COD because this one would be easy to forget.… Expand
  31. Hellbug
    Nov 11, 2011
    4
    How do all of these MW fans not see what all of these "meaningless" reviews are pointing out? Don't any of you think it's messed up that these people are scamming people into buying the same gaming experience multiple times in a row? I'd be willing to bet most of those who are bashing this game are not BF3 fan boys (though it's obvious that many love BF3, but hey that is what happens whenHow do all of these MW fans not see what all of these "meaningless" reviews are pointing out? Don't any of you think it's messed up that these people are scamming people into buying the same gaming experience multiple times in a row? I'd be willing to bet most of those who are bashing this game are not BF3 fan boys (though it's obvious that many love BF3, but hey that is what happens when a good game is released), they are just able to objectively judge the difference between the previous MW franchise games, and this one released now. By the way, a new MW was announced for 2012! "Yippee skippee! I love getting scammed as long as my goldfish attention span has its hunger sated!"… Expand
  32. Jerkinator
    Nov 12, 2011
    4
    I've been a fan of the Call of Duty series for a long time now, but this latest installment has left me pretty disappointed. Multiplayer is obviously why 98% of people buy these games, and alas there is where my complaints are. For one, the maps seem smaller than in previous games and loaded with barriers and objects meant to make you really weave through the map. This creates a veryI've been a fan of the Call of Duty series for a long time now, but this latest installment has left me pretty disappointed. Multiplayer is obviously why 98% of people buy these games, and alas there is where my complaints are. For one, the maps seem smaller than in previous games and loaded with barriers and objects meant to make you really weave through the map. This creates a very frantic pace for the gameplay and leads to a lot of surprise gunfights and less strategical wars.

    Furthermore, my biggest complaint for this game is with the spawn system. I've already been spawned dozens of times IN the middle of the screen of the enemy who just killed me. This leads them, as they're often camping, to kill me instantly before I can even move. I can almost watch myself get killed twice in the replay, it's that ridiculous. They really need to tweak the spawning system in a patch because getting killed upon spawning (which happened to me five times in one nine-minute game) makes you just want to throw down the controller and find something else to do. This has never been a huge problem in the other games in the series, so I don't know why it's so prevalent now.    … Expand
  33. Shin-
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    70 euros for an upgrade, you should be ashamed, We are tired of the usual soup.

    Game outdated, the single player campaign is short, boring and predictable, you know there are many people who likes to play in single and so did not pay homage as the multiplayer is full of annoying people.
  34. Colamilkshake
    Nov 13, 2011
    4
    [MP only] Sad. That's the first word I think about when I think MW3. The gameplay is nice, very nice. Sad is that it's just AS nice as MW2. Why? Most likely since it is MW2. New colors, new maps, a (very) few new maps and other stuff, most without any impact at all gamewise. I'm playing the same game as 2 years ago. But it's not only gameplay that's 2 years old. Even when I've pressed X[MP only] Sad. That's the first word I think about when I think MW3. The gameplay is nice, very nice. Sad is that it's just AS nice as MW2. Why? Most likely since it is MW2. New colors, new maps, a (very) few new maps and other stuff, most without any impact at all gamewise. I'm playing the same game as 2 years ago. But it's not only gameplay that's 2 years old. Even when I've pressed X to get away from the "Activision and title"-entry, I meet the same game as 2 years ago. Menus, options, everything.
    And finally, the saddest part. THE MAJOR news about this game is supposed to be the massive connect, compete and improve functionalitys in ELITE. 2 outrageous mess ups:
    1. It's not IN the game, it's freaking outside!!! I have to SHUT DOWN my game to enter this part. 2. Hasn't worked since release. I mean, I thought BF3 was undone on release, but this. You release a 2 year old polished game again and in those 2 years that passed they couldn't managed to make the one new part.    … Expand
  35. Raidenkov
    Nov 13, 2011
    4
    It's been almost a week from release of MW3 and I still cannot log on online server of Multiplayers Game. I am a PS3 user and I have been exciting about MW3 before its release and on top of 60 bucks game, I also purchased some modification to my controller to help me better shot in the multiplayer games. Sadly, when I get the game copy, it keep telling me that "The MW3 online service isIt's been almost a week from release of MW3 and I still cannot log on online server of Multiplayers Game. I am a PS3 user and I have been exciting about MW3 before its release and on top of 60 bucks game, I also purchased some modification to my controller to help me better shot in the multiplayer games. Sadly, when I get the game copy, it keep telling me that "The MW3 online service is not available, please check the status bla bla bla". My PS3 works fine and PSN works fine as well, I can log on servers of every other games like Uncharted 3, but it's just a pain in the a** for MW3. Activision and IW, please fix this or I have to sell my PS3 copy and get a XBOX version, which mean I will pay extra for XBOX LIVE membership.… Expand
  36. Tha_Lowkey_One
    Nov 17, 2011
    4
    The users have spoken MW3 sucks to play and BF is new and fun. MW3 is MW2 with new maps basically an over glorified expansion pack of a 2 year old game running on an old and out dated engine and BF3 is a brand new experience new engine amazing graphics and realism. The reviews aren't suspiciously low they are just accurate. Activision thought they could release the same game and it wouldThe users have spoken MW3 sucks to play and BF is new and fun. MW3 is MW2 with new maps basically an over glorified expansion pack of a 2 year old game running on an old and out dated engine and BF3 is a brand new experience new engine amazing graphics and realism. The reviews aren't suspiciously low they are just accurate. Activision thought they could release the same game and it would be ok. Basically making COD the Madden of Shooters. That method didn't fly now people want to say the reviews are fake. You released a bad product and are being exposed. I am not a BF or COD fanboy as far as shooters go I am a die hard Socom fanboy. But first and foremost I am a gamer and I like technology thats why I have a LCD LED TV and awesome surround system and a PS3 with blu-ray and etc. I appreciate innovation and pushing the bar and thats where MW3 epically fails. Its running off of out dated technology where as BF3 is runing off a brand new engine with amazing capabilities. I rented both titles to see which I would like and BF3 is the best first person military shooter I have ever played. Infinity Ward got it right with MW2 but we all have played that game into the ground we really didn't need or want a carbon copy of MW2. We wanted MW3 to be better and build off of what part 2 started. Sadly they dropped the ball on this one.… Expand
  37. scuzzlebutt78
    Nov 14, 2011
    4
    I enjoyed the single player but the multi-player was the same old crap. Activision rakes in millions off this series and the least they could give us, console gamers, is Dedicated Servers. This would fix the connection interruption, Host migration and hit marker lag. I've loved the COD series up till Black Ops, this is where i started to get bitter. Playing MW3 sealed it. I feel like I'mI enjoyed the single player but the multi-player was the same old crap. Activision rakes in millions off this series and the least they could give us, console gamers, is Dedicated Servers. This would fix the connection interruption, Host migration and hit marker lag. I've loved the COD series up till Black Ops, this is where i started to get bitter. Playing MW3 sealed it. I feel like I'm playing MW2 (not a bad thing) and paid 60 bucks for an expansion pack. It's tragic but people will continue to drink the Koolaid that Activision sells. I for 1, unless the next one is innovative, am done with the COD series.… Expand
  38. RUBBERPANTS
    Nov 14, 2011
    4
    This game is just a repacked retweaked version of modern warfare 2 it feels like I am playing the exact same game. Infinity ward made absolutely no innovations to the COD series, and I bet that they won't next year when another calladooky comes out, it has so much hype and it so much suck's. save your money for battlefield 3 now that's a real first person shooter game.
  39. Rems
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    I have to admit that i'm fairly disappointed by MW3. Story line seems chaotic and all the missions are too short to have any joy from gameplay :/ in multiplayer besides new maps and few more weapons game doesn't bring anything new... MW3 can be considered as a patch (map and weapon pack) for MW2... and the most important part... its way too expensive!
  40. h1n1viruz89
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    I will say i have played video games since ps1, ps2, ps3 xbox, and xbox 360 being my Top most played console mw3... Copy and paste of mw2, yes they gave some tweaks here and there.. but its the EXACT same thing. Brought back gold guns (More like brown guns) its good if you want to rent but to pay the full $60 i wouldnt do a red box. anyways i only play since most of my friends play this.I will say i have played video games since ps1, ps2, ps3 xbox, and xbox 360 being my Top most played console mw3... Copy and paste of mw2, yes they gave some tweaks here and there.. but its the EXACT same thing. Brought back gold guns (More like brown guns) its good if you want to rent but to pay the full $60 i wouldnt do a red box. anyways i only play since most of my friends play this. good for social gamming but for serious Gaming ... its a joke Black ops was and still is the better Game, ill prolly be playing that more then this game… Expand
  41. Goffery
    Nov 16, 2011
    4
    I should have known they would just pump out another cheaply made Call of Duty game, too bad I didn't learn my lesson after Black Ops ended up being a disappointment. The campaign is looking good so far (I'm only 4 levels in) but we all know you don't buy a COD game for the campaign. The multiplayer has just gotten worse. The biggest problem is the MAPS. There are 16 maps and NONE of themI should have known they would just pump out another cheaply made Call of Duty game, too bad I didn't learn my lesson after Black Ops ended up being a disappointment. The campaign is looking good so far (I'm only 4 levels in) but we all know you don't buy a COD game for the campaign. The multiplayer has just gotten worse. The biggest problem is the MAPS. There are 16 maps and NONE of them stand out. Every map plays the same; respawn, run around some buildings or alleys, shoot anything that moves and then just get killed from behind. LAME. It seems everything that made MW2 so much fun is gone now. Shotguns cant be equipped as secondary weapons, perks like last stand and stopping power are gone and sniping is not fun anymore cause there are NO OPEN SPACE MAPS!!!!! The only noticeable change is the different "strike packages", but even those are not exciting.… Expand
  42. albert_h_1982
    Nov 18, 2011
    4
    the game is ok...at best. nothing spectacular. they could have done a better job.campaign and spec op are the ok i guess and multiplayer well mw2 and black ops are a hell of alot better. you cant go into half of the buildings, the maps arent that great, you cant hide in the shrubs and bushes like in mw2, . all cod that they have made got better than the last one but this one,, well i dontthe game is ok...at best. nothing spectacular. they could have done a better job.campaign and spec op are the ok i guess and multiplayer well mw2 and black ops are a hell of alot better. you cant go into half of the buildings, the maps arent that great, you cant hide in the shrubs and bushes like in mw2, . all cod that they have made got better than the last one but this one,, well i dont know what they were trying to do. the game is mainly for people who like to run around, so campers this in not really for you. they should have put more places to hide. like in real life. you just wouldnt go run around holdine dual weapons in a real scenario would you, they should of made it for campers non campers and those in between. the guns are not all that, some of the perks and packages are ok nothing great, i will keep playing the game because i bought it but i will see how long i can go on playing a game like this, its ok. its not great and its not that horrible where i would play a sports game instead of it. yall could of did alot better...mw2 and black ops gameplay is better, black ops is better than both of these games combined… Expand
  43. jackh1982
    Nov 18, 2011
    4
    Each time I play Modern Warfare 3, I invariably become more disappointed. The Single Player campaign plot devices have not evolved at all since MW2. Doing my best to avoid spoilers, I'll just say that the campaign revolves around a seemingly endless onslaught of enemies and is peppered with a few dramatic scenes designed to keep your attention. Multiplayer...it's the same as MW2, but dullEach time I play Modern Warfare 3, I invariably become more disappointed. The Single Player campaign plot devices have not evolved at all since MW2. Doing my best to avoid spoilers, I'll just say that the campaign revolves around a seemingly endless onslaught of enemies and is peppered with a few dramatic scenes designed to keep your attention. Multiplayer...it's the same as MW2, but dull and tired. 16 new maps...and they're all the same: drab locales with obstacles cluttering every path. Most of the obstacles, although only waist high, are not scalable even for the elite warriors of Delta Force. On top video quality settings, the player models are also drab...gray uniforms with shiny gray helmets fighting against dull gray buildings. The playability of the MP maps compared to MW2 and BO is poor. The only necessary MP strategy in MW3 involves a submachine gun and Extreme Conditioning (the Marathon Perk replacement). You can run around all day pegging the slow players. In exchange, their fast teammates will run around and peg you. It's mind-numbingly lackluster combat. Oh, and need we need to remind them that Matchmaking for PC sucks balls? I don't pay for 15mbps cable to connect to a host in France and suffer poor latency. We don't even have the option to select a region to connect to. Sure, you can join and host dedicated servers, but they're UNRANKED. Thanks for nothing!… Expand
  44. EliteOrion
    Nov 19, 2011
    4
    Another year another call of duty. Modern Warfare 3 is a game that will be familiar with most gamers because much hasn't changed or been improved upon since the last one in the series. Single player as with the previous entries in the series tries to grab hold off you but never quite does. The multiplayer unfortunately has been unplayable for the past week. Whenever you enter a matchAnother year another call of duty. Modern Warfare 3 is a game that will be familiar with most gamers because much hasn't changed or been improved upon since the last one in the series. Single player as with the previous entries in the series tries to grab hold off you but never quite does. The multiplayer unfortunately has been unplayable for the past week. Whenever you enter a match it always has lag regardless of whose host. There hasn't been one match without lag that destroys the experience for PSN. Now this isn't the same for the 360 though; Modern Warfare 3's matchmaking on xbox has been less laggy than the PS3 version. Perhaps there will be a patch to fix this in the future but my recommendation is to rent this first and possibly buy it in a month or so when a patch will be released and when the price goes down.… Expand
  45. 1True_Gamer
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    It's the same game as MW2 but still fun. Same looking graphics and guns. There is a lot of people playing so that's a good but not worth the $60 I paid for.
  46. alfiesred47
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    This is a fair review in my opinion, i'm not slating it, i'm not rimming it. It's my own thoughts.

    I loved CoD4: Modern Warfare; it was a real breath of fresh air. Modern Warfare 2 built on CoD4 and brought a much more in-depth feel to the game, making it very immersive. Modern Warfare 3 was hyped up to be amazing. It was, but no more amazing than MW2 was. The small things that really    This is a fair review in my opinion, i'm not slating it, i'm not rimming it. It's my own thoughts.

    I loved CoD4: Modern Warfare; it was a real breath of fresh air. Modern Warfare 2 built on CoD4 and brought a much more in-depth feel to the game, making it very immersive. Modern Warfare 3 was hyped up to be amazing. It was, but no more amazing than MW2 was. The small things that really irritated me, was the laziness of developers. Titles and emblems are exactly the same. The multiplayer challenges have been named the same, (absentee killer, or something like that) it's very embarrassing. I actually cringed while perusing these lists, it's really bad that they didn't come up with new names. I still enjoy playing it, but I really don't think they should be allowed to charge another $50 for this. I'm not sure how true it is, but I heard people even found the code for MW2 maps in the PC install of MW3? How is that acceptable. It hints to a true "copy and paste" job. Spec Ops, oh my god. One of the missions is the same setting, objective, and feel to a campaign missions. I am not surprised people have all jumped on to rate this game badly. It's not that loads of people hate it, it's just a lot of people feel strongly that it was a disappointment. And not enough people are defending it by coming on and putting a 10/10 on. I honestly feel my score has been justified. I have enjoyed the game, but it really is not much different. They brought us new guns, new maps, and two new game modes. I know they won't change the format, I don't want them to. I want them to not charge us as much because it really isn't a brand new game. IGN themselves said the Campaign lacked any immersion of the player.

    I hope you enjoyed reading.    … Expand
  47. luiscp3
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    SHORT REVIEW: I don't really like the improvement of the game. Although It really is an enjoyable game. The only thing that bugs me and dislike about the game is that the bullets sound effects isn't realistic,
  48. Animus44
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    Right i wanted to give a review on this game after giving a solid amount of time on it to really give a fair rating on my experience with the game.. The Campaign - there was so much Hype for this game.. the last time i felt something like that was for Halo 3.. ( that was a disappointment for me) and JUST like Halo3 this was a disappointment.. i understood that the game wouldn't be tooRight i wanted to give a review on this game after giving a solid amount of time on it to really give a fair rating on my experience with the game.. The Campaign - there was so much Hype for this game.. the last time i felt something like that was for Halo 3.. ( that was a disappointment for me) and JUST like Halo3 this was a disappointment.. i understood that the game wouldn't be too long.. i have come to expect it from the MW Series, but i just didn't expect it to be so the same set piece's .. i was expecting something new / something different.. i don't know what different but just something??.. the story itself was pretty weak actually .. MW2 was better.. the main Events that happen u can just tell were coming. also i found that doing it on the hardest Setting was also alot easier than previous MW Games.. Maybe just coz im so used to how the game works ( coz it hasn't changed ) that is why it seemed easier than normal maybe.. In all story was a complete letdown but i wasn't too shocked. Survivor - hmm pretty fun the first time you do it.. but after starting doing the forth map on the list.. i was already bored with it.. i understand why you need to have a different profile so all the guns etc arnt unlocked from your main multi-player rank.. but god its slow to do the same maps to level up.. couldn't they have done it by a certain wave.. you can use the sentry launcher . not by a certain rank.. to me it just seems like a long winded way in getting you to play this mode till you reach the highest level to use everything. or just make the leveling up faster i think that would have been better.. in all the mode is pretty boring after a few attempts. Spec Ops - Loved! on MW2.. MW3 its kinda the same stuff really.. well the challenges are a little different which is good.. but i don't know.. just misses something *new* maybe im being a little harsh.. i think my main problem is that they are so suited to co op.. im actually more a single player person when it comes to challenges like this.. altho i have done the most of them 3 star.. i just felt.. this would have been quicker and MUCH easier on *co op* which is good but also bad coz the game doesnt get any easier when doing on your own.. or any harder when you do it Co-op.. but in all Spec ops is actually ok but once you done it.. no replay value at all.. good thing is spec ops ranking is linked with Survivor. ( thank god )

    Multiplayer - Well you either love it or hate it.. to me the newer idea's they brought onto MW3 like the strike packages is Brilliant. more guns, and alot of maps .. ( il get more onto the maps in abit )
    but for these small things.. the rest of the stuff is either the same or Just plain bad.. Spawning for me is a real issue on this game.. i read people prefer it or they hate it.. im a hater... I cant stand when my whole team spawn on me when im trying to sneak around the back of a group / team only for everyone else all of a sudden by my side.. i think a big drawback is that with so many strike packages / support / kill etc.. no one shines out anymore.. Ive never been *elite* at the game but i have good games / bad games.. but i donno just everything is so chaotic with UAV spam Alot of Kills but alot of Deaths.. but tbh i think thats due to the map... I HATE the maps. i like there is alot of maps but hate the style.. u can get attack from every direction all the time.. so with the dodgy spawning of people right next to you even tho you just killed 3 of them.. all their team just spawned next to each other.. its just crap...shotguns and knifing is broke IMO.. but i think thats a personal Issue.. Verdict - in all the game was / is a let down for me.. alot of hype for the same game as before but much Worse. im still playing it.. just coz i hope they might fix some problems.. i would rent it if i could turn back time. I may even consider going back to MW2. the game is Deff not a 0 but i wouldnt give more than a 4.. alot of reused stuff and i hope the creators of the game read all these opinions of the people who buy their Games and come up with something new and exciting and not a Micheal Bay Story mode.    … Expand
  49. NyreX
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    Call of Duty could be better if they actually did more changes in their games.
    I only saw a small number of new stuffs, besides that nothing.
    It is very disappointing to hit the video industry with this and quite expensive.
    But i must say i enjoyed the campaign.
  50. smiley1004
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    this game is basicly the same as mw2 and is a disapointment to all those fans of cod that this new game would be so alike like cod mw2. i played this game and i enjoyed it but only for a certain amount of time after a while it gets pretty boring. the multiplayer is really fun but once again after a while it gets boring
  51. Jesp1
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    Just a forewarning opinion based on multiplayer only. MW3 is a disappointing downgrade from Blops, period. I really wanted to like the game, but its plagued by lack of any type of innovation whatsoever and maps that really have no business being so pathetic in this day of gaming. The maps are reminiscent of something from the early days of this type of FPS, and not in a good way.Just a forewarning opinion based on multiplayer only. MW3 is a disappointing downgrade from Blops, period. I really wanted to like the game, but its plagued by lack of any type of innovation whatsoever and maps that really have no business being so pathetic in this day of gaming. The maps are reminiscent of something from the early days of this type of FPS, and not in a good way. Unoriginal and chaotic, it appears that they literally took a random map generator and went with it. As far as being new, about the only NEW item is killstreaks, and most of them just seem redundant and pointless (1 helicopter, vs. a bunch of helicopters, vs 1 tough helicopter). I miss the Blops bomb RC car, or dogs. Would have been nice if they put just a bit more thought into the rewards. Customization has taken a slide from Blops also with little more than what was offered in MW2. Speaking of MW2, MW3 feels more like an expansion and less like a sequel. Zombies are gone giving way to a "meh" spec ops survival. Play wise the game is currently frequented by spikes of near unplayable lag, its not uncommon to be in a firefight and lose and then witness yourself not even facing the enemy or firing a shot during playback. Ultimately this game feels like a marketing scam with the only thing going for it is that it is a badly modified copy of a excellent game from years back.… Expand
  52. mgastryker
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    If Modern Warfare 2 had not been made, then this game would have been an amazing step forward from Modern Warfare. Sadly, that is not the case. Activision has not improved their game much at all. It is basically the same game with a similar campaign, the same, if not worse, multiplayer, and a new survival mode which, compared to zombies mode, is decent at best. Starting with the campaign,If Modern Warfare 2 had not been made, then this game would have been an amazing step forward from Modern Warfare. Sadly, that is not the case. Activision has not improved their game much at all. It is basically the same game with a similar campaign, the same, if not worse, multiplayer, and a new survival mode which, compared to zombies mode, is decent at best. Starting with the campaign, it is the best one of the series, with lots of near death experiences and large explosions. Although, it seems to much like it's predecessor. Spec Ops mode returns, with 16 missions featuring various objectives to be completed, much like Modern Warfare 2. The survival mode seems fun at first, but after a few games, it becomes apparent that it is basically a rip-off of Call of Duty Zombies mode. Now on to the multiplayer, yes, the multiplayer. At first glance, it seems fantastic, brand new gun proficiencies, a new killstreak system, and new maps. But if you dive deeper, you'll find that over half of the guns are from the two previous Modern Warfare's and a couple from Black Ops. The gun proficiencies are just perks that were in previous Call of Duty games that could not be fit into this one. The killstreaks are mostly the same with new names. The only ones that strike me as brand new are the osprey and the juggernaut. The maps are just downright boring compared to Modern Warfare 2's. This may be a harsh review, but it's the truth. If your a hardcore Call of Duty fan, then you'll probably buy this game regardless of what you read. But know, you were warned.… Expand
  53. firecrack
    Nov 24, 2011
    4
    I'm a casual gamer in my 30's and have played the Call of Duty franchise since its inception. This is the first review I've ever posted for anything, but I felt the need to inform those that don't believe the negative hype, that, for the most part, it is warranted. I've logged 15 or so hours on the online multi-player and must admit it's very frustrating. Reasons why: 1) Hope you got 5I'm a casual gamer in my 30's and have played the Call of Duty franchise since its inception. This is the first review I've ever posted for anything, but I felt the need to inform those that don't believe the negative hype, that, for the most part, it is warranted. I've logged 15 or so hours on the online multi-player and must admit it's very frustrating. Reasons why: 1) Hope you got 5 minutes to let your playstation find you a game - and if you want to play Survival mode... forget about it. 2) I thought bullet detection took a step backward from MW2 to Black Ops... well, you ain't seen nothin' yet. 3) If you want to be completely frustrated, watch the kill cam a few times and watch dudes empty clips into you as you round a corner and they haven't even shown up on your screen. I realize, the more you play you get a 6th sense of where people are coming from and can "feel" someone coming around the corner, but I have a feeling many times people are getting the drop on me because of a faster internet connection, which I've never felt before in a CoD game... so bear in mind, this issue might not be suffered by you if you have a super fast internet connection.

    I must admit, the low score is due grading on a curve based on the other CoD games. Considering how great a game MW2 was, I just feel the ball was really dropped here. Credit where credit is due though... graphically beautiful, worthy single player campaign conclusion, and just about everything about it is a giant step up from Black Ops, but I thought Black Ops was pretty crappy with the exception of online Zombies.

    Definitely going to sell on Ebay (after logging about 80 hours less than I would normally on a CoD game) and give Battlefield 3 a try. Maybe that franchise takes steps forward instead of back. Based on the reviews here, I'd bet this was Call of Duty's last record breaking opening day for sales... I know I am no longer eagerly awaiting what is next in the franchise.... and I really have to wonder about the glowing reviews from professional critics???? Reminds me of the 4 star reviews for The Phantom Menace.    … Expand
  54. stevepossible
    Nov 27, 2011
    4
    While not totally disappointed in this game, I have some major qualms with the multiplayer. I don't buy COD for the single player, so my review is based solely on multiplayer. Pros
    - EXCELLENT sound. This was the first thing I noticed about the game. The guns sound realistic, have a bass sound. The vocal acting is great. Sounds effects, etc is the best I have heard
    - Addition of new    While not totally disappointed in this game, I have some major qualms with the multiplayer. I don't buy COD for the single player, so my review is based solely on multiplayer. Pros
    - EXCELLENT sound. This was the first thing I noticed about the game. The guns sound realistic, have a bass sound. The vocal acting is great. Sounds effects, etc is the best I have heard
    - Addition of new strike packages - I like the idea of catering to different player types. I think this creates a more interesting environment and awards different play styles.

    Cons
    - matching and lag compensation and hit detection - penalizing people with fast internet connections? I often get 4-5 shots off on my screen, and inevitably get killed. I watch to killcam, and see not only did I get maybe 1 shot off on my competitors screen, but I may have even been facing the wrong way. Ridiculous. I have no problem getting beat by someone who is better than me at COD, I don't play that often. But it is quite frustrating to play, only to get 1:2 k/d ratio constantly because I have a decent internet connection.
    - Maps - very poor construction. Little to no cover. High killstreaks require more "luck" than skill in my opinion. No innovation (maps in CODMW2 were excellent, multiple levels, areas for cover)
    - graphics - meh ... nothing new here
    - guns even the "new" guns are just copies of MW2 (mp7 is uzi, FAD is the same as the 2000 gun)
    - spawning - The assault package is almost worthless because of spawn points; which often are right behind me.

    If this had come out 2 years ago, great. I would still only give it a 6-7 based on the many multiplayer shortcomings.

    I have seen that some of the producers have tweeted saying "this game is definitely not a 1.7" or something of that nature. I agree, but it is no greater than a 4-5 for sure at this point. Certainly not this great new experience that they so highly touted with all the hype.    … Expand
  55. TheRedHatGuru
    Nov 28, 2011
    4
    All I have to say about MW3 is that it's a disappointment for me at least. i mean i started the out on the campaign and it takes less then four hours to beat that just shows how little they cared about the campaign. i mean even black ops took about six hours to beat on the first try so what they just decided to kill every one off and expect us to ignore the length of the campaign i thinkAll I have to say about MW3 is that it's a disappointment for me at least. i mean i started the out on the campaign and it takes less then four hours to beat that just shows how little they cared about the campaign. i mean even black ops took about six hours to beat on the first try so what they just decided to kill every one off and expect us to ignore the length of the campaign i think not. Next is spec ops first they didn't increase the amount of missions that much and most of them just take patience to beat even on the hardest difficulty so clearly they didn't want to make tough challenges just long ones which is tedious and boring. Now onto Multiplayer where to begin oh i know its boring i mean come on over half the guns are from the last two games so no creativity there and kill streaks are either a easy to shoot down or B not worth using i mean a juggernaut can be killed by one grenade so ya its real worth the eighteen kills to use it. on a personal note its also boring with all close quarter maps and no fun to play by your self. i played for five minutes with out my friends and quit from lake of any feeling at all. so i guess what I'm trying to say is MW3 is just a sad half ass attempt to make another call of duty game before people realize it's like the madden series where it's the same stupid crap time after time again. in conclusion its a lazy attempt at a game and show little to no new content so I give it a four based solely on the fact that it call of duty is still fun to play against friends with but that's all i see in this game.… Expand
  56. Badkat907
    Nov 28, 2011
    4
    This game for the PS3 is just plain brutal. The multiplayer is a daily lag fest. I have top quality internet service at 25Mbps consistant. I brand new PS3 Slim, but yet get frame rate drops and constant lag spikes that make online play more of a chore than fun. The maps are horrible. Most maps are just cluttered with objects everywhere which pretty much guarantees you will get "stuck" onThis game for the PS3 is just plain brutal. The multiplayer is a daily lag fest. I have top quality internet service at 25Mbps consistant. I brand new PS3 Slim, but yet get frame rate drops and constant lag spikes that make online play more of a chore than fun. The maps are horrible. Most maps are just cluttered with objects everywhere which pretty much guarantees you will get "stuck" on something, and unable to move at all the wrong times. Random deaths are a daily game occurance with this game since all guns have the ability to shoot through walls. Doesnt really matter which weapon you use since it only takes a couple of hits to be killed. This game has more flaws than I can even list. No hit sounds, bad frame rate, matchmaking system is horrible, and get some dedicated servers................enough with this laggy crap!… Expand
  57. Palm_Tree_Bomb
    Dec 1, 2011
    4
    I'm one of the guys that you can generally throw in the same group of users that are pretty upset about the rehashing of this once powerful franchise. Yes, I'm one of the millions that bought this game thinking that Activision and Bobby Kotick would allow some time, effort, and innovation for this game and treat it differently than other franchises that have been grinded into dry dustI'm one of the guys that you can generally throw in the same group of users that are pretty upset about the rehashing of this once powerful franchise. Yes, I'm one of the millions that bought this game thinking that Activision and Bobby Kotick would allow some time, effort, and innovation for this game and treat it differently than other franchises that have been grinded into dry dust like Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk but we were trolled again. To me the 4 is a fair rating. It's mediocre and that's all the due that this game will get. For months I waited on the fence wondering whether or not I should get this game or Battlefield 3 and I chose this game to play with the large group of friends I have online. I knew that yes, it's being hounded by Activision, that most of the original staff of Infinity Ward left with their original bosses to create Respawn, and that IW once again decided against giving users a Beta to test the game out early...and now I see why just as everyone else has. Patched, reused graphics engine from MW1 and MW2 with a limited color palette that allows easy blending into environments, a recycled and repackaged Multiplayer and Killstreak system that no longer promotes a great player from pulling away from the pack, the maps in this game are badly designed that allow for either too much map circulation -or- choke point disadvantages by snipers and rear coverage, the weapon stats are incorrect once again (check with the PC's gun files that has been uploaded online...), and the revelation that there are even less game modes in MW3 than in Black Ops. I also feel that MW2's storyline ended up "jumping the shark" bad enough to gimp MW3's story with attempts to one-up the previous iteration. The icing on this bland cake? The Call of Duty ELITE, which charges you a hefty fee to follow your stats and give you a bit of an edge against your online competition...which...EA does that for free with Battlefield and I can even remember EA doing it for Need For Speed recently. The videos and tips you can get from ELITE? You can get that on Youtube from users like Machinima for free.

    Back the 1990's video games got fair and unbiased reviews. Reviewers expected a natural progression from a series' starting point going into each sequel and if that game failed to improve, it got stagnant scores or worse. To the "professional" raters that have given this game anywhere between 7 to 10, do users a favor and reflect on what field you are in and change jobs. The apex of this series was MW2 and the Call of Duty franchise has been slipping ever since. At no point is this game worth the $60 admission price. A balley-hooed patch-and-map pack release at full price. Please guys, let's not let Bobby KoTICK and crew continue to rip us off.    … Expand
  58. agdued
    Dec 2, 2011
    4
    I'm giving this game a 4 out of 10 because while the multiplayer is copy and pasted from MW2 with new maps the campaign is solid and specs ops is a little worse than Nazi zombies but it is still pretty good
  59. Jutter64
    Dec 10, 2011
    4
    Disappointing! I love the MW series and I really looked forward to this new version. But what's new? The game itself was predictable and finished before I knew it. The graphics are great but the game looks like to revolve around some movie-like moments (like the crashing of the Eifel tower) and inbetween you just have to squeez the trigger and run around. Offcourse I bought the game toDisappointing! I love the MW series and I really looked forward to this new version. But what's new? The game itself was predictable and finished before I knew it. The graphics are great but the game looks like to revolve around some movie-like moments (like the crashing of the Eifel tower) and inbetween you just have to squeez the trigger and run around. Offcourse I bought the game to play online, again disappointing! Being used to MW2, the maps are much smaller (or atleast feel smaller) and as a result the players are all running around, resulting in a high killrate, getting killed fast and often. Less places to hide, not able to hide in bushes, no real sniper maps. Why didn't they just add these new maps as an add-on to MW2? Maybe one or two extra weapons? One plus: the "kill confirmed" gamemode I really like. But unfortunately not enough to stop me from returning to MW2 for on-line playing.… Expand
  60. theob
    Dec 13, 2011
    4
    I don't write reviews ever but this game annoyed me enough to write one. Its not a bad game, it is actually very entertaining, but its not a top of pile game and its more of a disappointment after so much hype. The graphics at times are really really average for this day and age. Not everyone wants to jump online so my gripe is with the single player mode, which was over pretty quick.I don't write reviews ever but this game annoyed me enough to write one. Its not a bad game, it is actually very entertaining, but its not a top of pile game and its more of a disappointment after so much hype. The graphics at times are really really average for this day and age. Not everyone wants to jump online so my gripe is with the single player mode, which was over pretty quick. They just didn't really try this time around. COD doesn't deserve the crown of shooters with this effort.… Expand
  61. Fr33T
    Dec 16, 2011
    4
    Oh my god. They did it again. They used the same game engine, the same graphics, the same interface... they only changed the game. I mean seriously. They have been making the same game since Call of Duty Modern Warfare. THE FIRST one.
  62. teol
    Dec 21, 2011
    4
    Campain looks like a good hollywood movie, but is really short... Multiplayer is buggy, and always the same, apart for maps, weapons etc... It is good for playing with family, or friends, but no more ! No improvements, new bugs, problems not fixed. THEY ONLY WANT TO STEAL OUR MONEY !
  63. ReviewCritic
    Dec 30, 2011
    4
    MW3 is a great game. The only problem is that it's the same damn thing. They think that just because they add the littlest things to every new COD, that people will still think it is fresh. Critics judge it so high because they get payed to rate it, and probably get the game free. But people judge it so low because they wasted their money, and it's the same thing as before. COD's onlyMW3 is a great game. The only problem is that it's the same damn thing. They think that just because they add the littlest things to every new COD, that people will still think it is fresh. Critics judge it so high because they get payed to rate it, and probably get the game free. But people judge it so low because they wasted their money, and it's the same thing as before. COD's only future is in zombies. Check my new account for games, I am only doing movies on here.… Expand
  64. yogi721
    Apr 20, 2012
    4
    COD fanboys, get ready because this one is going to sting. The Call of Duty series is back trying to restore the name of Call of Duty after what the past few games have been known as let downs. Spoiler alert: they failed. But first the good things about the game. While COD is the best selling game in history it is still one of the only FPS to run at 60 frames per second, this gives anCOD fanboys, get ready because this one is going to sting. The Call of Duty series is back trying to restore the name of Call of Duty after what the past few games have been known as let downs. Spoiler alert: they failed. But first the good things about the game. While COD is the best selling game in history it is still one of the only FPS to run at 60 frames per second, this gives an opportunity for COD to have a fast paced shooter filled with running and gunning. But yet all anyone does in this game is camp.... pity. but anyways the campaign that ended the modern warfare series was actually quite enjoyable but yet short. Now for the bad, still listening fanboys? COD has tried to use the same system over and over again but with more upgrades from the standard COD 4 game (the best cod ever) and its really starting to show. Its a shame they made a couple billion dollars with essentially an expansion pack. All this game feels like is modern warfare 2 with new maps, a few new weapons and features. The online community makes the online experience one of the most frustrating in gaming along with demon souls and ninja gaiden (games that are so hard its pointless for people who haven't played them). COD has turned into the mainstream game for all the kids out there. Its a lot like NIKE anymore, people buy it because its NIKE, the name of the brand means more than the quality of it. and while there are better FPS games out there COD will still be the best seller because the fan base is brand committed. Sorry COD but you lost a lot of your long time fans with your recent installments and I'm contimplating not buying the new cod when it comes out because I'm tired of being disappointed and then going on to play a real shooter like Battlefield.… Expand
  65. Daveman
    Jul 5, 2020
    4
    THE GOOD: Kill Confirmed is an exciting new game mode that puts a great twist into your typical FPS deathmatch. The new killstreak packages are excellent and provide more options to the killstreak formula. ----------- THE BAD: Graphics and gameplay are overly too familiar. Infinity Ward played it a little too safe with this title. Other than Yuri's confession, the story is a bitTHE GOOD: Kill Confirmed is an exciting new game mode that puts a great twist into your typical FPS deathmatch. The new killstreak packages are excellent and provide more options to the killstreak formula. ----------- THE BAD: Graphics and gameplay are overly too familiar. Infinity Ward played it a little too safe with this title. Other than Yuri's confession, the story is a bit predictable, overdone and lacks substance. ------ THE UGLY: Quickscoping has returned, and it's going to ruin a lot of people's moods. The Type 95 is an extremely cheap burst fire weapon. Commando perk is gone (I can't stab people from a distance anymore *sadface*). --------- FINAL VERDICT: It's still fast and fun, but it honestly feels more like MW2.5. Infinity Ward will need to step up their game on their next COD project, or else Treyarch (whom are open to player feedback) will take them by surprise.… Expand
  66. EpycWyn
    May 22, 2012
    4
    Modern Warfare 2 was a classic. I enjoyed what new features it brought to the COD franchise. MW3 is just a heaping pile of repetitive and manipulative polished turds. The prestige system is manipulative and any player of this game knows what I'm talking about when I say prestiging doesn't change a damn thing. Nothing new or truly innovative has been added to the multiplayer. I hated thisModern Warfare 2 was a classic. I enjoyed what new features it brought to the COD franchise. MW3 is just a heaping pile of repetitive and manipulative polished turds. The prestige system is manipulative and any player of this game knows what I'm talking about when I say prestiging doesn't change a damn thing. Nothing new or truly innovative has been added to the multiplayer. I hated this game. Kills are unjustified in most cases anyway. Camping, glitching, glitched spawning, spawning where campers are camping to kill you, ridiculous throwing knife and explosion kills made this game a terrible experience. I played this game out to level 72 prestige 1 and I hated the whole thing. I thought there was something I was missing, perhaps I just needed more experience? Oh what horrors this game plagued me with. The entire COD reputation has been tarnished by this uncreative and manipulative money-whore of a game. I regret ever desiring this garbage. I planned to get back into the FPS genre with this game but this game has made it so I'll never return. The sad part is that millions of people thought at one point that this game would revolutionize the FPS genre. COD is only good in theory a.k.a. game trailers, not in actual games. Not anymore.… Expand
  67. RedBen
    Jun 10, 2012
    4
    Just to start, a lot of the reviews that bash the game are biased, poorly written, and littered with spelling and grammar issues. In other words, many of the reviews that bash this game are probably written by 7 year old kids who haven't even played the game. Now that that's out of the way, lets begin!

    Graphics: People often bash the game for graphics, but the graphics are actually quite    Just to start, a lot of the reviews that bash the game are biased, poorly written, and littered with spelling and grammar issues. In other words, many of the reviews that bash this game are probably written by 7 year old kids who haven't even played the game. Now that that's out of the way, lets begin!

    Graphics:
    People often bash the game for graphics, but the graphics are actually quite well done. Moving on.

    Story:
    The story leaves off from Modern Warfare 2, where the Russians are attacking the U.S.! Why? Because of the infamous "No Russian" mission from Modern Warfare 2, which Makarov, the main antagonist and leader of the Ultranationalist terrorists, blamed the U.S. for the massacre at the airport. Anyways, the Russian president was going to sign a peace treaty with the Americans, but Makarov captured him, cancelling the treaty. The Russo-American war goes on and eventually develops into World War III.

    I just wanna get to gameplay, so, just to wrap the story up, it seems to be a repeat of a lot of story lines.

    And now, the part I wanted to discuss from the start, Gameplay:
    Gameplay should be familiar to veteran CoD players. Aim. Shoot. Kill. Hunt for play. Rinse. Repeat. Simple as that. However, the combat often takes place in close quarters, making SMGs and shotguns preferred over most weaponry. The maps often vary highly, but often give a similar experience each time I play it. The concrete pipe in Hardhat has massive firefights, the hilltop in Mission is a large fighting zone. In fact, every map but Dome has just one area where most of the fighting takes place, which can make experience from maps usually the same. The guns, perks, and killstreaks are mainly the same as Modern Warfare 2's guns, with some swap-outs, changes, and twists. Respawns are always either too close or too far from the action. And that final kill cam? Whoever made that is a sick, twisted, scum of the Earth. You can't even leave the server if you are being killed in it and you already got your bonus EXP.

    Overall, this game is bad, but is often bashed by 7 year old children who don't even own the game. Ben out.    … Expand
  68. Replika83
    Jul 11, 2012
    4
    Disappointing. CoD4 was very good, very addictive and well balanced. CoD: MW2 didn't live up to expectations, but did allright. Except multiplayer was starting to show cracks in it's shiny exterior. MW3 gives me a feeling of 'fail'. It's nothing new compared to MW2, except some new maps. The game is full of camping people, guns aren't well balanced and what's up with sniping?? SomehowDisappointing. CoD4 was very good, very addictive and well balanced. CoD: MW2 didn't live up to expectations, but did allright. Except multiplayer was starting to show cracks in it's shiny exterior. MW3 gives me a feeling of 'fail'. It's nothing new compared to MW2, except some new maps. The game is full of camping people, guns aren't well balanced and what's up with sniping?? Somehow they evolved at the best guns in the game. With some practice you're allmost invincible. Quickscoping *bam* dead. It's ridiculous and stupid and very unrealistic. Sniping should take skill, not some perk and auto-aim to make it a 1-shot-killingmachine you can carry around the map, run and sprint with.

    It's time for some closure and re-invent the series, with a new engine and some very good thinking through of the multiplayer, because it's lost allmost everything of it's greatness of CoD4. I can't say much of the single-player, just scratched the surface, but it's same-old-same-old...

    Stop milking it...    … Expand
  69. Tablegooroo92
    Sep 5, 2012
    4
    After playing the game for quite some time I feel like the game play just let me down. First of all, the sniping was entirely too easy. I felt like the .50 Caliber sniper rifle had a magnet to the enemy. Of course I didn
  70. HoodNation
    Sep 17, 2012
    4
    Wow how did they screw up this game. Just awful. The campaign is pretty boring until the end,Spec Ops is better in this game than MW2, and MP is just god awful. Overpowered perks like assassin and Deathstreaks like final stand, dead man's hand, etc. This is definitely the worst call of duty.
  71. jbully95
    Oct 8, 2012
    4
    Plz stop making these same boring games and do something new. MW3 was a disappointment. It was basically the same as MW2 online but worse due to all the nooby killstreaks and unbalanced weapons. At least try and make weapons that compete with each other rather then just 3 weapons that everyone uses because they chop up. Finally the campaign had no reply value at all and also it was tooPlz stop making these same boring games and do something new. MW3 was a disappointment. It was basically the same as MW2 online but worse due to all the nooby killstreaks and unbalanced weapons. At least try and make weapons that compete with each other rather then just 3 weapons that everyone uses because they chop up. Finally the campaign had no reply value at all and also it was too repetitive for my liking. I don't recommend unless a huge fan of the series but then you would of played it all before. The only thing keeping me from giving it a lower score was special ops which with the new zombie style combat operation thingo was kinda fun.… Expand
  72. ErnestBeqiri
    Nov 14, 2012
    4
    I'm f**king tired of COD, seriously. Modern Warfare 3 is the same game as It's predecessor in terms of multiplayer, and It's even worse. It's unbalanced, not fun at all. It's overly frustrating . Technically is downright horrible, following the same engine. The singleplayer is solid, but forgettable. And uninspiring. The special ops is the most solid part of the game. I am reallyI'm f**king tired of COD, seriously. Modern Warfare 3 is the same game as It's predecessor in terms of multiplayer, and It's even worse. It's unbalanced, not fun at all. It's overly frustrating . Technically is downright horrible, following the same engine. The singleplayer is solid, but forgettable. And uninspiring. The special ops is the most solid part of the game. I am really disappointed. As I loved MW1 and MW2, MW3 is a pile of sh*t. Avoid it. Buy Battlefield 3, It is better! (4.2… Expand
  73. Elucidate
    Jun 17, 2015
    4
    Overall, MW3 was nothing you wouldn't expect. Essentially a long DLC for MW2, this game tried its best to bank on the success of its predecessor Modern Warfare 2. A largely unchanged HUD, static multiplayer experience, uninspired campaign, and barely improved graphics make the $60 (if new) a hard sell.

    Little new features like the hybrid scope and new "point" streaks allow Activision to    Overall, MW3 was nothing you wouldn't expect. Essentially a long DLC for MW2, this game tried its best to bank on the success of its predecessor Modern Warfare 2. A largely unchanged HUD, static multiplayer experience, uninspired campaign, and barely improved graphics make the $60 (if new) a hard sell.

    Little new features like the hybrid scope and new "point" streaks allow Activision to save some face, but pale in comparison to the lack of improvement otherwise.

    Gameplay-wise, the campaign felt (and looked) very similar to MW2. The plot brings a more-or-less satisfactory conclusion to the Modern Warfare story. For me at least, the MW3 campaign seriously lacked in memorability (while MW2's campaign was quite the opposite).

    On the plus side, Spec-Ops is back, allowing for additional split-screen/multiplayer fun.

    The critics will continue to praise this game tirelessly, but the regular gamers have said it all. I don't believe MW3 deserves a 0, but I can understand why that particular rating is so popular here.    … Expand
  74. JohNathan_Drake
    Jan 11, 2014
    4
    MW3 is surely the worst game I bought in ps3 up until today.All the gamers were saying that call of duty is excellent and you need to buy it.Before I played MW3 I have played MW2 & black ops with my friends and I wasn't impressed at all.MW3 has many many many many problems.The killstreaks were very annoying(especially attack helicopter).One helicopter in the sky just killing all the peopleMW3 is surely the worst game I bought in ps3 up until today.All the gamers were saying that call of duty is excellent and you need to buy it.Before I played MW3 I have played MW2 & black ops with my friends and I wasn't impressed at all.MW3 has many many many many problems.The killstreaks were very annoying(especially attack helicopter).One helicopter in the sky just killing all the people in every corner of the map(except from the people inside the buildings) and the user don't even control that helicopter, there's no skill in getting kills like these at all(it's really horrible). Also the maps were horrible.Not even one map was good.There were many glitches too(I hate when people get inside glitches and killing the other players and then feeling proud about theirselves).Missions and campaign wasn't good at all.The only mode that I liked was survival but I have played better survival modes such like U2 & U3 survival mode.And as always there wasn't any improvement in the graphics and the gameplay from the previous COD games.COD style is very annoying.You just spawn and shoot like a maniac.The maps are too little and desgined only for close-ranged battles and your health is too low.The result of this is that when you need to hide from someone or just stay in a place and use your sniper rifle there will be a guy behind you and backstabb you in about 10 seconds max.The only good thing about MW3 is the variety of weapons you can use.So can anyone tell me why COD MW3 is so famous and has so many earnings?… Expand
  75. McCrumReviews
    Aug 12, 2014
    4
    I'm pretty sure anything can beat this entry to the Call of Duty canon. Stab me with a fork in my eyes and pour rubbing alcohol in them, I'm pretty sure I'll enjoy myself more than I did while playing this game. "MW3" is 6 hours of pure torture, from start to finish. I understand that Infinity Ward was split up part way through the production, but come on. It's not that it makes a ton ofI'm pretty sure anything can beat this entry to the Call of Duty canon. Stab me with a fork in my eyes and pour rubbing alcohol in them, I'm pretty sure I'll enjoy myself more than I did while playing this game. "MW3" is 6 hours of pure torture, from start to finish. I understand that Infinity Ward was split up part way through the production, but come on. It's not that it makes a ton of mistakes, it doesn't. The problem I have with the game is that it is derivative of the previous installment of "Modern Warfare 3" in every way possible. The cinematic thrills that fans have become accustomed to when playing Campaign are the same as "MW2". Your character gets shot a few times, gets stabbed, falls through a roof, gets attacked by dogs, but wait... Didn't this happen in the last game? Yes, it did. It's all the same. Adding a few new guns and perks doesn't make for a new experience online. The new Survival mode, which is an addition to the previous, and returning, Special Ops, is okay, but not nearly as good as Treyarch's "Zombie Mode", which this is attempting to replicate. It's a less then enjoyable experience, and you'd be better off getting Modern Warfare 2. Seriously, this game sucks.… Expand
  76. MCFThousandCuts
    Aug 7, 2015
    4
    Ok is this game built upon a solid foundations yes but unfortunately this call of duty sums it up copy and paste cod games it sad that even on the PS4 call of dutys little has changed while it's not all bad some coop missions keep things interesting but a bland story and some very underpowered weapons they may as well gave you air rifles also bland environments basically to be avoidOk is this game built upon a solid foundations yes but unfortunately this call of duty sums it up copy and paste cod games it sad that even on the PS4 call of dutys little has changed while it's not all bad some coop missions keep things interesting but a bland story and some very underpowered weapons they may as well gave you air rifles also bland environments basically to be avoid although the plat is very easy to get if you don't mind getting you character to lvl 50. I suggest Black Ops or MW2 if you have to absolutely have to play on a cod game or if you the more the ww2 kinda guy world at war.… Expand
  77. ColeEngo
    Nov 30, 2022
    4
    The only saving grace for this call of duty was the campaign, which was great, but the multiplayer was my least favorite of the series that I played and survival did not hold up to zombies.
  78. ClashCityRocker
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    Slightly better than the Xbox version, but still not worth it. Really old and been there, done that.. If you have played MW2, don't bother with this, buy Uncharted 3 or something worthwhile instead., don't waste your money on this game, it's simply not worth it.
  79. TheKerbinator
    Mar 17, 2012
    3
    I'm sure ive played this all before? Oh how im bored of this. Call of duty series needs a complete revamp, until then i will not be buying another. Battlefield series is leaving COD behind.
  80. EhRaD
    Nov 21, 2011
    3
    I dont receive money to write about a game and I will write this just in response from a specialized article I just read that is trying to misjudge metacritc users reviews. I will not talk about MW3 graphics or gameplay, if you play this game for half an hour you will see that CoD is not about that. I bought this game for the only reason that all of my friends are playing this everyday andI dont receive money to write about a game and I will write this just in response from a specialized article I just read that is trying to misjudge metacritc users reviews. I will not talk about MW3 graphics or gameplay, if you play this game for half an hour you will see that CoD is not about that. I bought this game for the only reason that all of my friends are playing this everyday and I thought it could be a way to have a good time with them but I was wrong. The single player campaign is simply terrible and I died in one day in multiplayer more often than one month with Dark Souls. I really cant figure it out where is the fun. You start running to somewhere on the map to be killed by who knows who and listening to 13 years old boys offending one each other. Im totally out of that violence in the games discussion, but parents should pay more attention for the unbelievable talking that you are forced to hear in this game, it is a new kind of violence extremely disturbing: racist jokes were the lightest thing that I heard in two or three days. Even with a team mode, they never play like a team. Resistance 3 multiplayer, just to mention one, is a game far superior than that. Now I can see that CoD is a market phenomenon that brings money to the industry and it is only that. Just to reinforce: nothing new in the warfront.… Expand
  81. Darius77
    Nov 11, 2011
    3
    This review is primarily about online play. If I could say anything about MW3 online is it lacks impact. It is a generic cookie cutter FPS. It lacks impact because you never truly FEEL like you have that 'boom' factor like in the other COD installments. The wow factor of killing opponents in this installment is about cardboard copy as it gets. The spawning is a complete nightmare. AnyoneThis review is primarily about online play. If I could say anything about MW3 online is it lacks impact. It is a generic cookie cutter FPS. It lacks impact because you never truly FEEL like you have that 'boom' factor like in the other COD installments. The wow factor of killing opponents in this installment is about cardboard copy as it gets. The spawning is a complete nightmare. Anyone who doubts this check out your advance UAV while people are spawning. The spawn trapping is almost by accident in some cases. I think this is a case where a name sells and quality really didn't matter. If you are looking for a generic shooter with some cool kill-streak functions but little else then this is the game for you. Personally I hoped it would rival MW2 or better but this was a sad and disappointing let down.… Expand
  82. EternalGamer2
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    The critical praise for this game kind of demonstrates how bankrupt the backbone of game journalists are. They are too afraid to call something out if it costs a lot of money to make and has really good production values. Make no mistake: MW3 still has great production values. The explosions are nice and the graphics are great. But it is also nearly completely lacking in new ideas.The critical praise for this game kind of demonstrates how bankrupt the backbone of game journalists are. They are too afraid to call something out if it costs a lot of money to make and has really good production values. Make no mistake: MW3 still has great production values. The explosions are nice and the graphics are great. But it is also nearly completely lacking in new ideas. This is the same game you played many times before and the single player is more on rails than ever before. If you buy these games just as a "yearly update" like a sports game, you might find it totally acceptable, but anyone who is actually looking for a fresh experience, there is none to be had.… Expand
  83. xfamas
    Nov 14, 2011
    3
    Multiplayer is good for a COD game; little changes I mean I am happy with the better balancing but seriously feels like a DLC, this is like Battlefield BC2 Vietnam. Only its $60 not $15, also about 2/3 down the campaign (main reason I bought the game loved MW story line) Infinity Ward gives you the middle finger and laughs at you by making one of your favorite characters die. Seriously? IMultiplayer is good for a COD game; little changes I mean I am happy with the better balancing but seriously feels like a DLC, this is like Battlefield BC2 Vietnam. Only its $60 not $15, also about 2/3 down the campaign (main reason I bought the game loved MW story line) Infinity Ward gives you the middle finger and laughs at you by making one of your favorite characters die. Seriously? I was expecting much more. Other than that the game is still decen… Expand
  84. gabe129
    Feb 1, 2012
    3
    Kill me now. This pretty sums up this whole colossal disappointment, I never thought I would say this about a game but this is actually worse than Black Ops. The more you play the game, the harder it becomes to live on this planet anymore.
  85. blackmagicmarkr
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    Buying Modern Warfare 3 this year is like wiping your butt with your hands while staring at a roll of Charmin Extra soft. Unless you are a potty-mouthed pre-teen with a high pitched voice that gets babysat by the tv...
    avoid this shameless repackaging like the plague.
  86. megantereon
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    WHY isn't there a demo for this game? Because few would pay $60 for this if they knew what they were getting. After the reviews I borrowed it, and decided it was not worth more than $20. So I am returning my unopened pre- order and will get something else. I have MW and MW2 and will continue to enjoy them for the $120 they already cost me. I made the mistake of getting Black Ops andWHY isn't there a demo for this game? Because few would pay $60 for this if they knew what they were getting. After the reviews I borrowed it, and decided it was not worth more than $20. So I am returning my unopened pre- order and will get something else. I have MW and MW2 and will continue to enjoy them for the $120 they already cost me. I made the mistake of getting Black Ops and regret it. i will wait until some of the unhappy gamers sell their game. It will be under $30 before xmass. I'm waiting until it hits $19 which would be a fair price for the qualtiy of this game. For $60 this is a 3.0.… Expand
  87. FlightofStairs
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Is MW3 a bad game? No, not really. The graphics are slightly bland and the level design is pretty bad in some spots, but that's really it. Why is it a 3? It's a waste of money. Aside from the Survival mode, there is virtually nothing new. The HUD is even the same! Now, the HUD doesn't mean much but it does go to show that this game was pretty shoehorned because they didn't have anything toIs MW3 a bad game? No, not really. The graphics are slightly bland and the level design is pretty bad in some spots, but that's really it. Why is it a 3? It's a waste of money. Aside from the Survival mode, there is virtually nothing new. The HUD is even the same! Now, the HUD doesn't mean much but it does go to show that this game was pretty shoehorned because they didn't have anything to add to the HUD. Overall, it's a 3 out of 10 because it's no different than the last 4 CODS. If you want to spend 65 bucks, spend it on something worth while...like Skyrim. Now, I have yet to play Skyrim, but I can assure you it'll be a vastly different experience than MW3.… Expand
  88. Frankiepals
    Nov 20, 2011
    3
    Just pathetically terrible. Nothing new or innovative. I can't see how a company that makes so much money can't even afford to upgrade their graphics engine for the fans. The maps are the worst in any installment so far, and multi-player is so unmemorable you will not believe this is a COD game. I'll give it a 3, because there were some instances in the campaign that I enjoyed. OtherJust pathetically terrible. Nothing new or innovative. I can't see how a company that makes so much money can't even afford to upgrade their graphics engine for the fans. The maps are the worst in any installment so far, and multi-player is so unmemorable you will not believe this is a COD game. I'll give it a 3, because there were some instances in the campaign that I enjoyed. Other than that, this game is a zero.… Expand
  89. lamother47
    May 15, 2012
    3
    at first i liked this game so so, but now there is a plague of campers that simply make it impossible to be enjoyabe. COD must be put to rest............................................................................................NOW
  90. Novelty987
    Dec 6, 2011
    3
    This was worth a $2.00 rent at redbox. I played the main story for about 2 hours and was already bored of it. I even tried multi player for less than an hour. These games are really starting to get tiring. I have no intention to buy this game. There is nothing fun about this game and if you look at the story and game play from an arm length away, it seems like a cheesy B-rated action flick.
  91. Artomoz
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    Multiplayer: It feels a bit broken, then again it was Sledge Hammer that made the multiplayer aspect of the game. The servers are laggy. The hit detection is still the same old Modern Warfare you'd expect. Knifing the air gets a kill. Shooting bullets onto an invincible hit box gets a kill, whilst the player is way out of harms way. Hit detection is way off in general. Bullets still do notMultiplayer: It feels a bit broken, then again it was Sledge Hammer that made the multiplayer aspect of the game. The servers are laggy. The hit detection is still the same old Modern Warfare you'd expect. Knifing the air gets a kill. Shooting bullets onto an invincible hit box gets a kill, whilst the player is way out of harms way. Hit detection is way off in general. Bullets still do not penetrate thin walls or wooden crates but can penetrate 12 inch thick titanium steel. Character control in general feels a clumsy. Weapons are awkward to work with. Maps are the typical MW maps you'd expect if not worse. Unimaginative, bland, and with bad spawn points. Kills do not feel as rewarding as before and kill streaks are not as amusing. It's a great fast paced game but in general most of it feels like a rehash of MW2 with a blend of terrible Black Ops maps. Single Player: Same old cliche story suitable for people/children who need explosions and chaos to obtain an orgasm and deem it a good game or movie. I was in pain trying to finish this game, instead of enjoying it. I just wanted to get this garbage story to end and to my surprise; the expected MW ending. The AI of this game like always, using the same bad programing can cause some what of a humor. Small scaled linear pathway maps like usual. In conclusions, this game is nothing but a rehash of the old game (including Treyarch's Black Ops) with the number 3 stamped in front. Save your self $60 and keep on enjoying MW2.… Expand
  92. JetSetWilly1
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    Im new to gaming and have really caught the bug after playing on a friends PS3 this year , got MW3 last night (prebooked today of work !) Having spent over 7 hours on the game i have to say im really disappointed . I'd read and heard so much about the series that i thought it would be awesome but the graphics seem very poor and the multiplayer maps seem so small . I'd beenIm new to gaming and have really caught the bug after playing on a friends PS3 this year , got MW3 last night (prebooked today of work !) Having spent over 7 hours on the game i have to say im really disappointed . I'd read and heard so much about the series that i thought it would be awesome but the graphics seem very poor and the multiplayer maps seem so small . I'd been playing a game called Bad Company 2 for the last few months at my friends house and i thought this would be at least as good but sadly its not even half as good as that , there's no teamwork , no destruction , no vehicles , poorer graphics and a huge downgrade in sound quality . On the plus side it kind of runs quick and turning feels like im on ice but ive decided to strike while the iron is hot and sell this game as quick as possible to recoup my money and i'll go and get this new Battlefield 3 game that everyone seems to be raving about . If its as good as Bad Company then its already better than this MW3 . Sadly i think i got caught up in the hype but i'll not get my fingers burnt again and will stick with the Battlefield series from now on .… Expand
  93. S09_88
    Jul 31, 2013
    3
    MW3 is quite disappointing but for any COD fans is still worth playing. It does feel like it has been copy and pasted though and unfortunately gets boring quicker than previous titles in the series.
  94. Fogz
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    OK. What are we looking at, 2 years of development. What have we got? 3 months of work, 21 months of holidays that all i can see. Yes the game has strong combat elements and exiting but thats far from the point here. We pay £40 quid for this game and expect to get our moneys worth, well in this case we dont. The graphics look like a high end PS2 title at best ( would go as farOK. What are we looking at, 2 years of development. What have we got? 3 months of work, 21 months of holidays that all i can see. Yes the game has strong combat elements and exiting but thats far from the point here. We pay £40 quid for this game and expect to get our moneys worth, well in this case we dont. The graphics look like a high end PS2 title at best ( would go as far to say worse then MW2) weapons sound affect remind me of paint ball guns and the maps are as small as my back garden. In all a poor show, didnt expect this at all. Will think again before spending my cash on this franchise.… Expand
  95. MickATR
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    I am simply a gamer who likes a $60 game to be at least somewhat polished and offer something that is intriguing as well as visually and emotionally stimulating. This game simply does not deliver and I am embarrassed to say i bought it... We all bought into the hype, I just wish some of the developers would treat us as human beings and not mindless open wallets. I will give this game aI am simply a gamer who likes a $60 game to be at least somewhat polished and offer something that is intriguing as well as visually and emotionally stimulating. This game simply does not deliver and I am embarrassed to say i bought it... We all bought into the hype, I just wish some of the developers would treat us as human beings and not mindless open wallets. I will give this game a "3". It did offer some entertainment but absolutely nothing different then MW3. And as I was getting ready to log off last night someone said "your mom is a **** And that's when i remembered that this game is for children..… Expand
  96. Picasso
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    I don't often review things, simply because I make an informed choice about what I buy so am usually pleased with what I get. MW3 however is the exception to this rule. I bought this because I've played the series since COD3 and have generally pleased with the progression the game has made. Sadly there is no progression, just a quantum leap backwards.

    The multiplayer offers nothing really    I don't often review things, simply because I make an informed choice about what I buy so am usually pleased with what I get. MW3 however is the exception to this rule. I bought this because I've played the series since COD3 and have generally pleased with the progression the game has made. Sadly there is no progression, just a quantum leap backwards.

    The multiplayer offers nothing really new (Team Defender is good though), the maps are terrible - disjointed, cluttered and lacking any flow or indication that thought has been put into them. There are maybe 4-5 decent maps (IMO) but others may disagree on which they are.

    Anyway, my advice is: if you liked MW2, stick with it and keep £44 in your pocket. If you don't have MW2 then buy a second-hand copy of Black Ops which is FAR better multiplayer-wise. If you buy this then all you'll have is a sense of disappointment, a feeling of Deja-vu and a lighter wallet.

    I think the COD franchise/series has reached an inglorious end as I can't see it recovering from the various developer upheavals. Sad day.    … Expand
  97. Onyx81
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    I am giving the game a 3/10, but that doesn't mean the game is terrible. This is mainly a Multiplayer review as I have yet to play Spec Ops and Campaign. The engine that MW2 runs on is re used in this blockbuster sequel that so many fans have anticipated. What this means is that the gameplay is the same, and the graphics are the same. The updates to the game, core gameplay, and networkingI am giving the game a 3/10, but that doesn't mean the game is terrible. This is mainly a Multiplayer review as I have yet to play Spec Ops and Campaign. The engine that MW2 runs on is re used in this blockbuster sequel that so many fans have anticipated. What this means is that the gameplay is the same, and the graphics are the same. The updates to the game, core gameplay, and networking code are what defines this year's Call of Duty.

    What they have updated does make the game play better and encourage teamwork; however, with the core gameplay vastly unchanged, the game still promotes you to play as a lone wolf. The map design is up for debate, but my take on the new maps is that they are great. They flow really well and I never have problems finding enemies and rarely get snuck up on. The main thing they changed to the core gameplay is how strong the weapons are, and how they can be used. The weapons are very strong and this is not a good thing. The more powerful weapons allows anyone who is new to the series to easily get lots of kills, even against veteran players. Shotguns are back to being a primary weapon, and I'm very happy with the decision. The maps allow shotguns, which have also gotten a damage buff, to preform very well and suits anyone who like likes to move around the map often. The networking code that the game runs on isn't very good either. In other game I play, it says I have a perfect connection, but in MW3 I have a horrible connection and it is very hard to find matches despite it being a brand new game. The networking cod the game runs on also causes the hit detection for bullets to be terrible. When you are further away your bullets usually hit an enemy, but when you are at a close to medium-close range, it takes a while for the bullets to hit someone even when aiming down your sights.

    The multiplayer overall captures the fun gameplay of MW2, and the new maps make for fast paced and intense matches, but the game does suffer to some problems. The miniscule updates made to the game, core gameplay changes, and networking all make this game feel like an overpriced expansion pack. If you are a person that has played a Call of Duty game before, this game doesn't have much changed and I would recommend buying it used or at a cheaper price. If you are a new player to Call of Duty I would recommend this game, but don't be surprised at the problems the game has. MW3 was supposed to be a blockbuster game, but it only feels like an expansion pack to MW2 that costs too much money and has some problems that shouldn't be there.    … Expand
  98. kidcharlemagne7
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    Did you play Modern Warfare 2? Good, I hope you don't mind paying 60 dollars to continue playing it. This game is a complete rehash, with little in the way of new content to supplement the aging graphics and sound. Speaking of sound, it's nice to see that they literally recycled every sound from the last game. This is criminal, lazy development like this should not be tolerated. It'sDid you play Modern Warfare 2? Good, I hope you don't mind paying 60 dollars to continue playing it. This game is a complete rehash, with little in the way of new content to supplement the aging graphics and sound. Speaking of sound, it's nice to see that they literally recycled every sound from the last game. This is criminal, lazy development like this should not be tolerated. It's basically Madden in shooter form. I used to be a fan of this series but this is just too much. Activision, Infinity Ward, and Sledgehammer, you should be disappointed in yourself.… Expand
  99. icarusbird
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    Congratulations on somehow milking more and more money out of each subsequent copy of CoD: Modern Warfare. This game would be more aptly titled "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Ep 3," as it is essentially an expansion pack to the same game we've been playing for four years. Infinity Ward really phoned it on the single-player campaign, and the multiplayer is--yet again--another glorified mapCongratulations on somehow milking more and more money out of each subsequent copy of CoD: Modern Warfare. This game would be more aptly titled "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Ep 3," as it is essentially an expansion pack to the same game we've been playing for four years. Infinity Ward really phoned it on the single-player campaign, and the multiplayer is--yet again--another glorified map expansion and balance tweak. Modern Warfare 3: you get 9 for quality gameplay, minus 2 points for leaving that gameplay unchanged for four years, and minus 3 more points for charging us 60 bucks for the exact same experience. And you know what? Minus one more point for selling us over-priced DLC which was probably finished weeks before the game released.… Expand
  100. MattCrawfish11
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    I'm really quite surprised that they got away with giving this a $60 price tag. What is advertised as an innovative "shooter to end all shooters" is actually what seems like a simple copy/paste of it's predecessor. Every Call of Duty game up to Modern Warfare 3 brought something new. A new engine, new guns, new mechanics, ect. I'll admit Black Ops was fairly similar to Modern Warfare 2,I'm really quite surprised that they got away with giving this a $60 price tag. What is advertised as an innovative "shooter to end all shooters" is actually what seems like a simple copy/paste of it's predecessor. Every Call of Duty game up to Modern Warfare 3 brought something new. A new engine, new guns, new mechanics, ect. I'll admit Black Ops was fairly similar to Modern Warfare 2, but at least it was DIFFERENT. Modern Warfare 3 is a shameless re-usage of the same engine, even going as far as to use models from Call of Duty 4 in the campaign. While we're on the subject, how about that campaign. It's frustratingly short, and on top of that, the "profound, impacting" moments which laced the experience we're hardly just that at all. They came off as forced and almost bland. The only redeeming (using the term lightly) thing about Modern Warfare 3 is it's multiplayer. Keep in mind that I say loosely, as it's basically a slightly tighter and more varied Modern Warfare 2. That's it. That is literally all it is. Lets wrap it up, this isnt worth my time. What had potential to be something great ended up falling flat on it's face. Modern Warfare 3, or should I say Modern Warfare 2.5, throws up a big sign that says Activision needs to hang up its Call of Duty hat unless it can bring something new to the table. A score of three may be a little harsh, but it really is almost exactly the same as Modern Warfare 2. Hate to be tough, but I also hate paying $60 for the same thing I played two years ago.… Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

17
#17 Best PS3 Game of 2011
1
#1 Most Discussed PS3 Game of 2011
16
#16 Most Shared PS3 Game of 2011

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
88

Generally favorable reviews - based on 39 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 38 out of 39
  2. Mixed: 1 out of 39
  3. Negative: 0 out of 39
  1. Push Square
    Feb 10, 2012
    90
    There's a tangible insistence from gamers that this series needs to evolve, but it seems unwarranted when it still leads the FPS class. The engine's definitely in need of an overhaul, but when it comes to thumping set-pieces and addictive multiplayer design, Modern Warfare 3 is still in a league of its own.
    Read full review
  2. GameSpot
    Feb 1, 2012
    85
    By sticking to the series' strengths, Modern Warfare 3 delivers some of the best competitive, cooperate, and single-player shooting in the business.
    Read full review
  3. Playstation: The Official Magazine (US)
    Jan 4, 2012
    90
    As a complete package, Modern Warfare 3 takes the cake. [Jan 2012, p.67]
See all critic reviews »