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. JonnyBigBoss
    Oct 12, 2014
    7
    This is more Call of Duty. It's fun to play, is highly polished, and has a ton to chew on. But really it's highly derivative. You should know what to expect at this point.
  2. Phenom557
    Nov 14, 2011
    7
    As a fan of both the Call Of Duty and Battlefield series of games I can honestly say this is a solid game. As usual, InfiniteWard releases a polished game with another compelling story that is easy to lose yourself in. The campaign is by far one of my favorites from the entire Call Of Duty collection and once again provides non-stop action with return of characters you know and care about.As a fan of both the Call Of Duty and Battlefield series of games I can honestly say this is a solid game. As usual, InfiniteWard releases a polished game with another compelling story that is easy to lose yourself in. The campaign is by far one of my favorites from the entire Call Of Duty collection and once again provides non-stop action with return of characters you know and care about. The graphics engine is becoming dated, although it has had some small tweaks, they are hardly worth noting. However, on the topic of multiplayer, the game holds holds true to its infamous formula, but as i'm sure everyone has heard or seen for themselves, changes little. A few new kill-streaks and the addition of the very unnecessary COD Elite service is definitely not worth the bragging rights. If your looking to charge gun-first into matchmaking, expect MW2 with new maps....... In comparison, Battlefield 3 has a far superior multiplayer experience, but if you want another blockbuster campaign fighting along side Captain Price, MW3 gets the job done.… Expand
  3. Lugoves
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    In short. It doesn't measure up to IW MW2. But it's slightly better than Black Ops and WOW. I've always preferred Infinity Wards' 'Feel' of the gunplay more. I still like BF3 as well , for the Larger maps and vehicular combat elements. I like the new Perk System and Kill-streak system as being an average player rarely get the higher kill-streaks required. I also enjoy the twist on TDMIn short. It doesn't measure up to IW MW2. But it's slightly better than Black Ops and WOW. I've always preferred Infinity Wards' 'Feel' of the gunplay more. I still like BF3 as well , for the Larger maps and vehicular combat elements. I like the new Perk System and Kill-streak system as being an average player rarely get the higher kill-streaks required. I also enjoy the twist on TDM with the Dog Tags. I would actually score it a point lower than BF3 just because in the couple of hours I've been online and the modes immediately available to me I've only experienced fast & furious gun & run play. I haven't opened a mode or map that would encourage sniper/overwatch classes or stealth having much emphasis. The Elite system is well set up, but currently overwhelmed by demand and rather unresponsive server replies.… Expand
  4. chinoyray
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    Im giving this a 7. The single campaign is fun and exciting but the multiplayer feels like a dlc of mw2. Elite feels like a scam.
    Havent played more spec ops but its fun as always.
  5. juicejuice
    Feb 3, 2013
    7
    For me this is the best first person shooter out there because of it's similarities to the best first person shooter of all time: COD4.
  6. Watermelon789
    Jan 4, 2012
    7
    For Infinity Ward, this is the laziest game they made. For Sledgehammer is not a great introduction to the game industry but at least it's a nice move , still not the best. Starting with the campaign is a great ride worth taking but we all know that when we play a CoD game is solely in the multiplayer aspect and nothing more unless you spend some time with the other mode ( Zombies ) butFor Infinity Ward, this is the laziest game they made. For Sledgehammer is not a great introduction to the game industry but at least it's a nice move , still not the best. Starting with the campaign is a great ride worth taking but we all know that when we play a CoD game is solely in the multiplayer aspect and nothing more unless you spend some time with the other mode ( Zombies ) but this time is the other mode called " survival " that the name itself describe it all , survival. The graphics looked fine enough with a little detail but is the same good thing we've have seen since Mw2. Some new cool modes are acceptable like the innovative Kill Confirm that consist on taking the dog tags etc but i don't feel compelled enough to play this modes because they feel worthless I never felt any motivation to play other modes but only Team Deathmatch .MW3 didn't felt like that juggernaut game that if it was announced caused me nostalgia , other than that those little problems, or boring things dragged a game that was a triple A franchise. I hope that the next one recovers from this hard wound . Still for those that liked the fast paced formula they won't be dissapointed .… Expand
  7. Ru3
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    The game is yet again a walk through huge setpieces that, unfortunately, have already been done before. The scenario harks back to Crysis 2 or Resistance 3 minus the aliens and chimeras. I don't believe it does anything NEW with single-player besides the continuation of a story.
    The multiplayer, however, is largely the motivation alot of people, including myself have and will have for    The game is yet again a walk through huge setpieces that, unfortunately, have already been done before. The scenario harks back to Crysis 2 or Resistance 3 minus the aliens and chimeras. I don't believe it does anything NEW with single-player besides the continuation of a story.
    The multiplayer, however, is largely the motivation alot of people, including myself have and will have for buying this game. Comparing it to modern warfare 1 and 2, it is much the same; however, if you've been playing Black Ops for the past year and want a fresh start, this is it. Multiplayer is based much less upon 'who can run around knifing the fastest' and more upon 'how can you best kill the other team?' It's much more fast-paced that MW2 from what I have seen, but is a whole different ballpark to Black Ops; an experience that won't let you run-and-gun and kill everybody just because you have the fastest reflexes.

    How do you judge a game? On graphics? The textures, colours, overall feel of the game is much better than, say, blackOps, but I don't think it's anything to be amazed about- at the very least, it does a bit better with framerate. Audio- I'm not sure if this is because of me being a former blackops regular, but the gun sounds seem a bit more... I don't know, iffy? More 'pewpew' than 'BLAMMM'..... I'm not sure how to fully express that.

    Single-player- a must ONLY if you really really care about the endings to a mediocre storyline

    Multiplayer- only if you care about chasing the majority of the multiplayer community who, whether they reviewed this game well or not, will be playing online and constantly saying 'THIS GAME SUXXX!'. Yes, the 12-year-old prepubescent idiots are there still, as are the cashed-up-bogans.

    Overall; Okay, the review is my own opinion of this game. I'm not going to say it's shattt because, like I said, I actually quite like to play. But I can also see how this game has shortcomings of its own. Between this and BF3, I'd play BF3 for the grand experience of a warzone; I'd play Call of Duty to be a one-man-army. Neither game is monumental, and neither should be GOTY. I give this game a 7/10 because, it's not the worst game in the world, it's not the most amazing game in the world, and yeah, I actually DO play this game.    … Expand
  8. cylixdemas
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    The third installment into the Modern Warfare series is somewhat disappointing. While the game is a really good game nonetheless, do not expect anything drastically new. There is everything -- from the mechanics to the perks --- that are nearly identical to Modern Warfare 2. There are some new additives, including survival, supportive kill streaks, and the assortment of weapons and levels.The third installment into the Modern Warfare series is somewhat disappointing. While the game is a really good game nonetheless, do not expect anything drastically new. There is everything -- from the mechanics to the perks --- that are nearly identical to Modern Warfare 2. There are some new additives, including survival, supportive kill streaks, and the assortment of weapons and levels. The game is good. It is what you have come to expect of Call of Duty. Nothing more, and nothing less.… Expand
  9. davenbettridge
    Nov 13, 2011
    7
    The Call of Duty creators must be criticized for having the greatest opportunity in the industry with unlimited resources to only coming up with a half good product. CoD is value for money but is lacking in original creativity. The special Ops is well done, the story pretty much sucks (no excuses it sucks), and the multiplayer is the same as ever with little innovation. I do recommend MW3The Call of Duty creators must be criticized for having the greatest opportunity in the industry with unlimited resources to only coming up with a half good product. CoD is value for money but is lacking in original creativity. The special Ops is well done, the story pretty much sucks (no excuses it sucks), and the multiplayer is the same as ever with little innovation. I do recommend MW3 due its surface fun and value for money but it lacks to what should have been something much much more.… Expand
  10. DGDrocks7
    Oct 12, 2014
    7
    I'm seeing extremism here. The game isn't bad, so stop giving it bad scores. Yet, this is almost the same game from 2009 (MW2), so it's definitely not a game to be awarded Game of the Year or something.

    The story takes place right after MW2 left off. Most of the time, you play as Yuri, a member of TF141 and Frost, a Delta Force operative. WWIII has broken out, and it's up to you to find    I'm seeing extremism here. The game isn't bad, so stop giving it bad scores. Yet, this is almost the same game from 2009 (MW2), so it's definitely not a game to be awarded Game of the Year or something.

    The story takes place right after MW2 left off. Most of the time, you play as Yuri, a member of TF141 and Frost, a Delta Force operative. WWIII has broken out, and it's up to you to find the man responsible for it, Makarov. Soap and Captain Price returns, and since is the final chapter in the MW series, you'll see how it all concludes. Honestly, only those who played the previous games will enjoy it. Everyone else will have no idea what's going on.

    Multiplayer is the same thing from previous games. You have now "Support" streaks, where if you die, you don't lose your streak; it carries over between deaths. The problem is that it's said to help your team, but one "Support" streak is a Stealth bomber, which hurts the other team. That's supposed to be in the "Assault" streaks, which is the traditional killstreak structure. Nothing else much here.

    What I did like though is "Survival" mode, where you must fend off waves of enemies on various maps. I spent most of my time, here. But this wasn't enough to justify the $60 price tag when it came out.

    Call of Duty does the same thing year after year; it's not worth paying $60, but now it's cheap; a new one is now like $20. I think that a perfect price for this game, so go get it.    … Expand
  11. Jakintosh
    Oct 8, 2012
    7
    I don't play online multiplayer, but from what I've played of the Single Player and the Spec Ops, I can say that this game is at least a solid FPS. It's not ground breaking, but it can provide a good amount of entertainment. I wouldn't say it is worth $60 + however much all the DLC costs, but it's still at least entertaining. It is very similar to previous games, but if you can get pastI don't play online multiplayer, but from what I've played of the Single Player and the Spec Ops, I can say that this game is at least a solid FPS. It's not ground breaking, but it can provide a good amount of entertainment. I wouldn't say it is worth $60 + however much all the DLC costs, but it's still at least entertaining. It is very similar to previous games, but if you can get past that, it's worth checking out.… Expand
  12. Creasy
    Nov 21, 2011
    7
    Great made game overall, but one that unfortunately starts to get a little boring now. Which isn't necessarily the game's / developer's fault. It's just the way it's being released (each year). The first 3 hours offered a big explosive spectacle, but I was very, very bored at everything. The last hour (out of 4) had some great scenes though.
    Graphics engine still looks good (and still    Great made game overall, but one that unfortunately starts to get a little boring now. Which isn't necessarily the game's / developer's fault. It's just the way it's being released (each year). The first 3 hours offered a big explosive spectacle, but I was very, very bored at everything. The last hour (out of 4) had some great scenes though.
    Graphics engine still looks good (and still better than many other games), but shows its age as well. Especially in comparison to Battlefield 3 (PC) - which had about the same quality overall, but deserves a little higher score just because of its visual quality.
    Overall: Well made action game (still better made and better action than 95% of the other games out there). A good roller coaster ride.    … Expand
  13. sinadoom
    Jul 14, 2012
    7
    MW3 SPEC OPS/SURVIVAL ONLY REVIEW. Based on playing spec ops and survival modes co-operatively in split-screen, I can say that Modern Warfare 3 does not fail in this department. Of course, the lack of staffing and time to produce this game has meant that, as with the multiplayer, a lot has been copied over from both CoD4 and MW2. However, the survival mode is something new- kind of a crossMW3 SPEC OPS/SURVIVAL ONLY REVIEW. Based on playing spec ops and survival modes co-operatively in split-screen, I can say that Modern Warfare 3 does not fail in this department. Of course, the lack of staffing and time to produce this game has meant that, as with the multiplayer, a lot has been copied over from both CoD4 and MW2. However, the survival mode is something new- kind of a cross between spec ops and zombies. It's very simple but still fun to play, but is not as gripping or addictive as zombies in World at War, for instance. You face attack helicopters, riot shield juggernauts, juggernauts, attack dogs and ordinary soliders. Unlike zombies though, the number of enemies per round does not increase; rather their difficulty and the types of enemies does instead. You can purchase upgrades such as weapons, attachments, perks, killstreaks and even a squad to help you by earning money, and XP ranks you up so you can buy better stuff once you hit the top level 50. You rank up in both spec ops and survival, and as with MW2's split-screen multiplayer, your progression and unlocks are saved in survival/spec ops. The good thing about survival is how you can play them on all multiplayer maps, so it's not like zombies where you have only a few to choose from. Whilst survival makes a genuinely decent addition to co-op, spec ops only manages to copy over missions from the campaign and ideas from both CoD4 and MW2. If you've played them two games, you won't be surprised by anything here. Some missions they've made the copy and paste VERY obvious (like Mile Highjack being a direct copy of Mile High Club). In terms of variety, there is a fair amount. There are a good mix of missions here, not all completely different from each other but an entertaining mix nontheless, with quality being the same as Modern Warfare 2's spec ops missions. The difference is that in MW3 each mission has criteria for high score, which may range from explosion kills, sniper kills, headshots, accuracy time, difficulty etc. What's more, each mission has leaderboards for both co-op and solo, which is nice because it gives them replay value which MW2 lacked. The missions themselves are your usual mix of firing range time trials, bomb defusals, objective collection/extraction, hostage rescue, providing cover for teammate in AC130 or sniping, stealth and just run and gun action. The missions themselves are actually pretty fun in co-op and the variety means that if you're bored of one playstyle you can easily try another mission or have a crack at getting a higher round on survival. Make no mistake, Modern Warfare 3 is by far the best Call of Duty game yet for co-operative gameplay, but I somehow feel that it's below Call of Duty standards. Don't get me wrong, it's just as good as MW2's co-op, but while Modern Warfare 2 pushed and raised the boundaries, Modern Warfare 3 hasn't really done anything new. There's nothing you'll be amazed by at all, and you will frankly laugh at some of their attempts when they blatantly copied and pasted some stuff over such as a building in the CoD4 Pipeline map in one of the spec ops levels. Once you've played the missions a few times though, you will get bored of them easily. However, due to the great variety you may find a few you like, so you could spend hours trying to improve your leaderboard ranking. Personally if it was me, I would much rather spend that time improving high scores in CoD4's arcade mode, as the levels were miles superior to any spec ops mission in MW3. Overall, it's a credible component of Modern Warfare 3 and if you purchased the game for a reasonable price you will not be disappointed. It's a solid co-op, but nothing new or mind-blowing. It's a safe bet for a co-op, but nothing special.… Expand
  14. DemonArcuied
    Mar 9, 2012
    7
    I'll be fair to this game and i only think it deserves 7 because of the survival and spec ops mission.
    *The Storyline, i felt i was repeating the same missions i was doing over in MW2, so there is nothing new, and nothing exciting, except a very few sequences & missions in the story
    *The graphics is a lil bit better i felt it was smoother and more crisp. *The Multiplayer, where should i    I'll be fair to this game and i only think it deserves 7 because of the survival and spec ops mission.
    *The Storyline, i felt i was repeating the same missions i was doing over in MW2, so there is nothing new, and nothing exciting, except a very few sequences & missions in the story
    *The graphics is a lil bit better i felt it was smoother and more crisp.
    *The Multiplayer, where should i start, i feel like i am playing a modified MW2 to be honest, they killed sniping in this game by making quick scoping very easy and there is not that much levels where you can snipe, the FMG9 no matter how much they update and Nerf the weapon down people abuse using it and it is the strongest secondary weapon and it is available from the start, so the weapon balance have become really horrible and bad in this game, the radius of dead man's hand is a joke a normal C4 doesn't kill within the same radius, it's like dead man's hand perk is danger close with C4.
    -The Spec-Ops & Survival Missions are where MW3 shines, i love playing both, they are great, challenging and enjoyable.    … Expand
  15. Toninho87
    Nov 9, 2011
    7
    The latest chapter of COD knows a lot of movies already seen, the same graphics engine dating back to COD 4, one has the feeling of seeing a part of the new multiplayer maps to a simple copy and paste the material of previous chapters, the story single player really too short to be true, all seasoned with a sense of dejavu that never abandons us. Title one likes to play online, but doesThe latest chapter of COD knows a lot of movies already seen, the same graphics engine dating back to COD 4, one has the feeling of seeing a part of the new multiplayer maps to a simple copy and paste the material of previous chapters, the story single player really too short to be true, all seasoned with a sense of dejavu that never abandons us. Title one likes to play online, but does not innovate at all, too little to really earn the money in the market price!… Expand
  16. 4newsit
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is the culmination not only of a historical
    trilogy of video games in the landscape but also a sign of the maximum
    result that this series can give. His praise for the masterful direction and the pace of events that always take the high frenzy of the game, as well as the variety of gameplay during missions, do not hide a series of flaws that could be accepted    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is the culmination not only of a historical
    trilogy of video games in the landscape but also a sign of the maximum
    result that this series can give. His praise for the masterful
    direction and the pace of events that always take the high
    frenzy of the game, as well as the variety of gameplay during missions,
    do not hide a series of flaws that could be accepted until
    recently, but in relation to the existing disparate competition, they declare the low quality of the product. The Campaign has lived in
    breathy, poorly supported by a fragmented narrative that
    It is useful to those who have never taken note of the previous chapters, with a final
    Epic really well orchestrated. The Multiplayer fray a little
    cards offering the always huge and vast park of arms and related
    upgrades, recovering the system run in the first Modern Warfare
    peppered the news already introduced in other chapters of the CoD series
    and increasing longevity have good, thanks to the fast-food style
    allows anyone to get into the match, and then play the game
    exit, then focusing on a model of game less tactical and reasoned
    ranging from the many maps and modes available. The missions to
    hoc such as Special Operations and Survival able to overcome the
    the absence of the Campaign in Co-operative and are of good quality. in
    Finally, a title recommended to all fans of the series are capable of
    close more than one eye on a product only from the reinvigorated
    spectacular events in the campaign and a long durability
    provided on the online games are fun and variety
    of innovation challenges.
    http://www.4news.it/9604-recensione-call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3.php    … Expand
  17. TalllPaul
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    I am playing the game wondering to myself, why?. Why did I just fork out 71â
  18. dellpeters
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    You guys are all a bunch of losers! You all gave it zeros and said you are disappointed by a game that you werent looking forward to. But you waited in line and bought it at midnight its only been out for 14 hours! You guys are pathetic get a life. You say they are going to keep making them because millions will but this one. But you bought it!
  19. Sandt
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    Generally there is nothing wrong with this game specifically. It is everything anyone could want in a modern day shooter. The problem is not with the success of the game mechanics. Most users feel ripped off to pay for a game with recycled artwork, dated graphics, and minor tweaks to a game they just bought a year ago for the same price. The Call of Duty series has turned into theGenerally there is nothing wrong with this game specifically. It is everything anyone could want in a modern day shooter. The problem is not with the success of the game mechanics. Most users feel ripped off to pay for a game with recycled artwork, dated graphics, and minor tweaks to a game they just bought a year ago for the same price. The Call of Duty series has turned into the Nickelback of the gaming world. Mass producing the same thing over and over again just to fill the shelves with games that pander to the masses. But, we often forget, the masses need some games too, and those people are enjoying this game and the experience that comes with it, and that is what they are paying for. Not for a new game, but for a very similar game with a fresh start for everyone and some new features. All in all, this game goes against artistic integrity and what it means to be creative, but maybe we shall refer to call of duty as a commercial art, just as other games could be considered more of a fine art. The game does not deserve a score of less than 5 at all, but if the scale was based on ONLY other CoD games, then it should score a 2.2. Thank you.… Expand
  20. ImaITGuy
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    Let me start off from a different perspective for my review since this is my first. 1. Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3 are 2 different games with 2 different type's of play style - therefore they are only really competing with each other on the $$$ front. - No need to hate on either from that perspective. Now that the "comparison" of BF3 to MW3 is out of the way let me get on with myLet me start off from a different perspective for my review since this is my first. 1. Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3 are 2 different games with 2 different type's of play style - therefore they are only really competing with each other on the $$$ front. - No need to hate on either from that perspective. Now that the "comparison" of BF3 to MW3 is out of the way let me get on with my review of MW3. Having played the COD series from the very beginning and feeling the game come into maturity as both IW and 3Arc passed the torch back and forth each year, I have to say that COD4 really set the stage for the modern 1st person shooter and like any great movie the sequels are hard pressed to hold their own against the original. MW3 borrows probably 90% of the textures, sounds, and map objects from the last 2 games. The cliche if it isnt broke dont fix it comes to mind. The multiplayer is where the game still remains at its best - (once you look past how similar to MW2 it really is), You will bgin to notice that the small tweaks that so many wanted from MW2 have been implemented in MW3 - it no longer takes an entire magazine to take down an enemy player on core mode, gun balance has come into line, perks have been adjusted to be less of a hassle so that true player vs player is the focus and finally the maps and layout of each seems to make for a better flow of battling and prevents slow gameplay. The only real problem with this game is that most players are Veterans of the series and were expecting a "NEW" game but were given MW 2.5. The game is still fun and enjoyable and with the added Spec Ops ( modern day live zombies ) and the stackable kill streaks, you wont regret purchasing it as long as you didnt buy the $99 version. For the new players that this is their 1st time playing the Modern Warfare series will find this one of the best games they have ever played and it will be well worth it. The biggest issue this game has to overcome is the purchase prices of $59 when it should be closer to $39 as an upgrade to MW2… Expand
  21. Thesifer
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    I give this game a 7. It's not a 10 (That would require a lot more work on the engine for graphics and other tweaks) .. 7 is probably fair, maybe a little high, but it helps balance out all of the 0's and 1's. The game isn't a 0 or 1, If you just play the Multiplayer it is a lot like MW2, that's true. Graphics - not much improvement. Maps overall maybe a little bigger for some of themI give this game a 7. It's not a 10 (That would require a lot more work on the engine for graphics and other tweaks) .. 7 is probably fair, maybe a little high, but it helps balance out all of the 0's and 1's. The game isn't a 0 or 1, If you just play the Multiplayer it is a lot like MW2, that's true. Graphics - not much improvement. Maps overall maybe a little bigger for some of them (some of them are actually pretty good) .. I traded in my worthless Black Ops, so I only paid about $45 for the game. So not out that much overall. Are there things I would like to see in the game? Sure. Part of the issue was obviously Sledgehammer not being used to the IW Engine 4.0 enough to upgrade it to a true 5.0 iteration. So it's basically IW 4.4 Engine (some of the stuff from MW2 is actually directly copied over in the multiplayer campaign which WAS somewhat lazy on their part)

    If you like campaigns, it's not bad. Short, but almost all of the shooters are. It felt somewhat less "roller coaster" over Black Ops, but it is still a linear story (obviously)

    There are many things I haven't even really used yet, like changing up killstreaks. There are some different ones.

    The game is worth playing, but I wouldn't suggest getting CoD Elite, and if you can find it used (which I'm sure after all of the raging there will be used copies popping up) I would go for it. It's definitely not as bad as Black Ops, but it's not as revolutionary as it could be either.    … Expand
  22. WyattDWilliams
    Nov 21, 2011
    7
    Well...Another year, another Call of Duty. What this game does well has always been the fun factor and that has not changed. The Single Player is Michael Bay-ish with huge explosions, crazy chases and limited story. The Campaign is short and forgettable with the overly used tragedies and mission. Go here, do this, fire fight, over-the-top event, repeat; For about 5 to 8 hours, depending onWell...Another year, another Call of Duty. What this game does well has always been the fun factor and that has not changed. The Single Player is Michael Bay-ish with huge explosions, crazy chases and limited story. The Campaign is short and forgettable with the overly used tragedies and mission. Go here, do this, fire fight, over-the-top event, repeat; For about 5 to 8 hours, depending on difficulty and skill.
    The Spec Ops and Survival modes are great fun with a friend. With the Horde like Survival mode and the Spec Ops mode is the same as Modern Warfare 2, time based mission that donâ    … Expand
  23. smate
    Nov 9, 2011
    7
    I was hoping that since those guys other people from Infinity Ward left MW3 would be good, not all wishes do come true. Quick scoping no scoping and the same old BS is back surged to us with a big COD elite FU. I will give you a 7 but if you give us the same old regurgitated maps from the others may change my mind. At least you gave us split screen online. Would have been less with outI was hoping that since those guys other people from Infinity Ward left MW3 would be good, not all wishes do come true. Quick scoping no scoping and the same old BS is back surged to us with a big COD elite FU. I will give you a 7 but if you give us the same old regurgitated maps from the others may change my mind. At least you gave us split screen online. Would have been less with out that survival and kill confirmed. At least Treyarch does something new. IS do something new popular or not people will still buy the game. I will buy the next Trearch game but I will not pay $10 for another one.… Expand
  24. poklane
    Mar 24, 2015
    7
    Average, that's all, this game is the definition of average. The graphics aren't improved at all from MW2 and Black Ops. The story is quite good if you like a rollercoaster, co-op is awesome with friends but MP is horribly unbalanced with no proper developer support.
  25. 8lackandwhit3
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    A big "LOL" at all the negativity in these reviews. For starters, I will be the first to say that no, MW3 is not revolutionary by any stretch of the imagination. It doesn't deviate from its predecessor in many noticeable facets. However, it's not MEANT to. While that sounds lazy on paper, and may cause some "I feel like I've done this before" moments as already stated by others, let's allA big "LOL" at all the negativity in these reviews. For starters, I will be the first to say that no, MW3 is not revolutionary by any stretch of the imagination. It doesn't deviate from its predecessor in many noticeable facets. However, it's not MEANT to. While that sounds lazy on paper, and may cause some "I feel like I've done this before" moments as already stated by others, let's all be mature adults and give the game a realistic score not based entirely out of being butthurt because you were silly and expected this to be a completely different game. MW3 is not a 0, or a 1, or anything on the lower end. Infinity Ward put time into this game, and while they may not have reinvented the wheel, they tweaked the things that worked for the first two games to make them BETTER. And I, for one, am completely okay with that.

    Bottom line: If you want innovation, look elsewhere. If you're like me and just want more of what you grew to love in MW2 with fresh maps and a more balanced multiplayer experience, don't pass this one up.    … Expand
  26. Marc2henripsnID
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    one of the Dev of IW is crying because of low scores well you guys didnt change anything
    you gave us the same game after 2 years like come on. next year another COD yet its going to be the same engine nothing new i wll skip the next one. i gave it a 7 because i wanted to know whats going to happen in the single player. i know it was predictable but at least it conclude the series. please    one of the Dev of IW is crying because of low scores well you guys didnt change anything
    you gave us the same game after 2 years like come on. next year another COD yet its going to be the same engine nothing new i wll skip the next one. i gave it a 7 because i wanted to know whats going to happen in the single player. i know it was predictable but at least it conclude the series. please get a new engine or get kill off COD. or next year i wll be back with "0" as score. yes if you got Black Ops or MW2 dont get MW3 save your money for something new or better. dont ask people to get BF3 either its boring as well. its up to you    … Expand
  27. MisterD
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." This has been the general approach regarding development of the Call of Duty series for the past few years, and it still remains true for Modern Warfare 3. The campaign is as you would expect from the Call of Duty series; a short, action packed, enjoyable but rather forgettable experience. The overall spectacle flare from Modern Warfare 2 returns and the"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." This has been the general approach regarding development of the Call of Duty series for the past few years, and it still remains true for Modern Warfare 3. The campaign is as you would expect from the Call of Duty series; a short, action packed, enjoyable but rather forgettable experience. The overall spectacle flare from Modern Warfare 2 returns and the story is slightly easier to follow, but just as forgettable over all. Spec Ops Mode also makes a return, with short missions that can be completed with a friend or on your own, with a few exceptions. These missions take some of the more memorable moments of the campaign and tweaks them up to make them even more intense. This time a new mode titled Spec Ops Survival has been added. This mode is similar to the horde mode of other game you may have played such as Halo and Gears of War. Surviving wave after wave of varying enemy types with a large variety of weapons and air support options across all the multiplayer maps, whether alone or with a friend it is always intense and insanely fun. Now, onto the main reason why this game exists, competitive online multiplayer. This remains largely the same as it was in Modern Warfare 2, but with a few new tweaks to the formula. There is less of a focus on killstreak rewards with the implementation of different types of strike packages. Assault contains the usual kill steaks that have been included in previous COD games. Support contains mostly non-lethal rewards that benefit the team overall, these rewards do require kills in order to earn them, but the count does not restart every time you die. Finally, there is the specialisation package that acts the same way as the Assault killstreak, but grants a new perk to your class instead of giving a new killstreak reward. The maps themselves aren't the strongest they've been in the series, but most of them have a nice flow during objective based game modes and none of them are god-awful. Overall, Modern Warfare 3 recycles a lot of old material from it's predecessor, but overall it is a strong package, and with the amount of multiplayer game modes and the almost infinite replay of Spec Ops Survival, you do get your money's worth from it. TL/DR: A refined version of the COD formula, don't expect to see any true innovation. Overall, a solid package.… Expand
  28. Boiling_baron
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    I enjoyed the gameplay (even though there were no "gotcha" moments) and better than average storyline. Voice acting was great. Multiplayer seemed to be about the same as previous iterations. IMHO, a fun and solid game, even if it doesn't go to "11".
  29. ssp_87
    Dec 5, 2011
    7
    ha all the troll qq. This game may be a bit of a rehash but it is def not worth a fail score. All these trolls rage but will play 60+ hours a week....RAGE TROLLS RAGE!!!!!!!!
  30. booty_juice30
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    Really people??? Honestly the game is pretty good, and maybe even better than modern warfare 2. I think there are a lot of haters writing reviews (bf3 fan boys). But this is honestly how I feel about the game...
    1. Graphics are just as good as modern warfare 2... maybe getting a little dated, but still 60fps looks pretty seem-less. 2. The campaign has always been weak in my opinion, and    Really people??? Honestly the game is pretty good, and maybe even better than modern warfare 2. I think there are a lot of haters writing reviews (bf3 fan boys). But this is honestly how I feel about the game...
    1. Graphics are just as good as modern warfare 2... maybe getting a little dated, but still 60fps looks pretty seem-less. 2. The campaign has always been weak in my opinion, and nothing has changed. Still a waste of about 4 or 5 hours.
    3. If you ignore all the racists and 13 yo on multiplayer it is just as fun as it has always been. The features and options are still top notch, and it is infinitely better than black ops multiplayer. I've heard complaints about map design, but once you get adjusted to the new layouts they are pretty good. So bottom-line buy the game if you like the other 2 modern warfare games, and if you didn't like them don't buy it. It is a fun multiplayer game with a bad campaign mode (7.5/10)    … 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 »