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
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 »