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. MW3iswank
    Nov 16, 2011
    0
    What an absolute garbage game this is! An abortion in fact. It makes me sick that I paid £80 for this game with the hardened edition. The Campaign is so linear, as always, that picking up enemy intelligence is no go because your team mates never shut up asking you open a door. As for the multiplayer well I might I might as well be playing soldier of fortune on a PC run by aWhat an absolute garbage game this is! An abortion in fact. It makes me sick that I paid £80 for this game with the hardened edition. The Campaign is so linear, as always, that picking up enemy intelligence is no go because your team mates never shut up asking you open a door. As for the multiplayer well I might I might as well be playing soldier of fortune on a PC run by a Rat on a wheel! There is no skill involved its spray and pray and you better hope to god you prayed hard. Black Ops trumps is being brought back off the bench and MW3 well... If I hadn't of paid £80 I would snap the disc.… Expand
  2. Phil_Collins
    Nov 16, 2011
    0
    Modern Warfare 3, despite the moniker "modern," manages to be archaic. If you are a fan of Call of Duty 4, then you will be delighted to find the some of the same building models in multiplayer. On the plus side, you can expect a future installment next year if you miss out on Modern Warfare 3. Joining the annual release of Madden, Call of Duty has become a yearly event. We can only hopeModern Warfare 3, despite the moniker "modern," manages to be archaic. If you are a fan of Call of Duty 4, then you will be delighted to find the some of the same building models in multiplayer. On the plus side, you can expect a future installment next year if you miss out on Modern Warfare 3. Joining the annual release of Madden, Call of Duty has become a yearly event. We can only hope for Call of Duty: Grenada in 2012.… Expand
  3. Mudkip
    Nov 16, 2011
    0
    Why did I pay 180 euro's for 3 times the same game? It's sad that Infinity Ward treats it's userbase so badly. The singleplayer is the stupidest I ever seen. I was happy when I noticed that it contains only 4 hours of gameplay.

    I am even more sad of the gigantic stupid fanbase who plays this game and dares to call themselves gamers.
  4. LeutArtemis
    Nov 16, 2011
    0
    Same old, same old. You can't expect that by adding 4 million new things to multiplayer it will be improved in any way. It's just a way of saying oh look at me, look how complex and multi-faceted I am. And asking people to vote one here because the user score was looking low? That's not good... not good at all...
  5. Willamette
    Nov 17, 2011
    0
    This is my first review at Metacritic. I've never written a review for a game but I just had to spend some of my time writing this because I thought this game is awful and seriously flawed and wanted to warn others not to dish out $60 for this poor game, even if everyone on your friend's list is playing this game. Like many people have said, MW 3 is more like MW 2.5 but people fail toThis is my first review at Metacritic. I've never written a review for a game but I just had to spend some of my time writing this because I thought this game is awful and seriously flawed and wanted to warn others not to dish out $60 for this poor game, even if everyone on your friend's list is playing this game. Like many people have said, MW 3 is more like MW 2.5 but people fail to mention that it's a step backwards from Black Ops which is extremely disappointing. When Black Ops came out, it was successful because it wanted to incorporate social networking elements. For example, you could design your own playercard by making a custom emblem and selecting from a wide array of backgrounds. You could mark your gun with the emblem. MW3 does not have playercards, it's essentially the exact same as MW2. Not only that, theater mode in MW3 is a mess, you can't keep track of what everyone's score is until the very end of the match, and flipping through different players is difficult because each time you switch, you look at a 3rd person view and must look at their gamer tag that way. The Maps are just awful too. They are all crowded with buildings and have many camping spots. When the game was advertised, it seemed like the maps would be cool because it'll be in urban places like New York and London. The problem is, they all look the same so you don't really feel like you're elsewhere. Combat Record is also gone in MW3. Instead, it's replaced by a extremely simplified one page list that cover the basics like K/D ratio and Wins and Losses. It's not like Black Ops where it tells you extremely detailed information about your gameplay. I've heard there's COD Elite, but first of all, I don't feel like installing an App on my PS3 and have to switch to it just to look at my Stats. Not only that, they want you to fork over 50 bucks for COD Elite and I use am not going to do that. Creating classes are also time consuming, as you have to go through a step by step process to add different attachments to guns. The Graphics are also the exactly the same as MW2. I'm extremely disappointed, and I wish I had listened to everyone else's reviews. The only improvement I've noticed is that the load times are a little shorter than Black Ops, but could it be because "MW 3" or I mean "MW 2.5" is a Step Backwards from Black Ops?… Expand
  6. pils123
    Nov 17, 2011
    0
    Maybe I'm not original but it's just the same game. Same graphics, same story line... It's just an expansive DLC of MW2. And maybe they say there are a lot of new things, that's just **** I hope Activision reads this and maybe they know there doing it wrong. ps: I hope they make COD: zombies because that's something I do love from COD
  7. phycon
    Nov 17, 2011
    0
    WORST money spent EVER.
    its pointless to try to compare this game who seems to be come direct from 2007 with the masterpiece of Battlefield 3.
    this is exactly the MW2, without even a disguise. same weapons, same engine, same (or worse) graphics, same game, after all. multiplayer is bad too, maybe it is funny for some kids, but who really wants a good FPS, stay away of it. i prefer to    WORST money spent EVER.
    its pointless to try to compare this game who seems to be come direct from 2007 with the masterpiece of Battlefield 3.

    this is exactly the MW2, without even a disguise. same weapons, same engine, same (or worse) graphics, same game, after all.

    multiplayer is bad too, maybe it is funny for some kids, but who really wants a good FPS, stay away of it.

    i prefer to play pitfall on atari than this game, its less disappointing

    it was clear that the activision wanted to make a cheap and fail game to sell based on the series name. im sorry of all people who have spent US$ 60 on this DLC for MW2.

    the sadly: i WAS a fan of CoD series. Now i hope (im sure) Battlefield takes the crown of FPS games and finishes definitively with the CoD kingdom.    … Expand
  8. DBCooper92
    Nov 17, 2011
    0
    To this day I still play Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, not because I am poor or against what's cool and popular but because there is no actual solid new features included in COD4's successors(both MW2 and MW3) that would warrant a purchase from me; it is quite evident that the evolution of the series has yet to take place. I have rented MW3 for a day, for about $2.13, and believe me whenTo this day I still play Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, not because I am poor or against what's cool and popular but because there is no actual solid new features included in COD4's successors(both MW2 and MW3) that would warrant a purchase from me; it is quite evident that the evolution of the series has yet to take place. I have rented MW3 for a day, for about $2.13, and believe me when I say I feel like a fool for paying $2 dollars to play a game that I already own. For those that wasted the full $60 + tax, you have my sympathies. The only graphical differences in the MW3 is the lighting, they tweaked with the lighting in MW2 also. Who are they trying to fool? 2 years between each game and the only visual improvement is something that can be applied to the previous game via patch?! The campaign is lackluster, explosions and "spontaneous" events are suppose to keep you on the edge of your seat but all it does is make me think about the better ways that I could've spent those two dollars I threw away renting this game. The multiplayer is mediocre, it has the fun aspects of COD 4(obviously), the frustration of MW2, and lacks the amount of customization that was present in Black Ops; overall, not a good mix. The gameplay keeps you wanting to play and give the game a chance, but the fact that there's overpowered killstreaks and anybody that manages to get three kills in a row is basically handed the win keeps you irritated, shaking your head, and ultimately bored. Unlike COD 4, where there are no ultra-overpowered killstreaks and the perks are balanced out, MW3 is, exactly what it set out to be, a super easy game that takes less skill. COD 4 is easy to pick up and play, but MW3 is RIDICULOUSLY easy to pick up and play; by my 3rd match I was already getting the top score, It took me about 10 or so on COD 4, and about 5 on Black Ops. How can somebody that doesn't know the maps get the top score on their third try? Killstreaks and an abundance of perks. There's little to no skill involved, the outcome of how good you will do is determined in the beginning of the match by how well your internet connection is at that juncture. Which leads me to another complaint, Activision, billions upon billions of profits later still no dedicated servers?! When games with a lower budget like Homefront can provide its users with dedicated servers? we all know that you are evil and that you are trying to take over the world by riding this COD bus until it breaks down and you end up with trillions upon trillions of dollars, just enough for the CEO of Activision to relieve himself of his daddy issues, but atleast try to delude us into thinking you are making somewhat of a quality product by investing atleast a couple of thousands or less on dedicated servers. It is insulting to gamer's intelligence to even release this game without the aforementioned. I only see little Jimmy playing this when his parents are asleep, or Brad and Chad after coming off of a very touchy lockeroom scenario and are ready to indulge in the usual dudebro fest.… Expand
  9. Bloodtau
    Nov 17, 2011
    0
    The exact same game as previous years, but with LESS and WORSE over all game play mechanics! The single player was short and lacking in every possible way and the multiplayer is no different than the previous dribble of years past. Save your money and make room for a real FPS shooter to hit the market
  10. Metakev
    Nov 17, 2011
    0
    There is just no excuse to make the same game every year and call it "new" time for some creativity.

    Every year this overrated, Michael Bay-Like games series gets the praise and money of billions of people for being the exact same game every year, while older game series try with everything they can to get with the times and improove their formulas to not to be left behing and still get    There is just no excuse to make the same game every year and call it "new" time for some creativity.

    Every year this overrated, Michael Bay-Like games series gets the praise and money of billions of people for being the exact same game every year, while older game series try with everything they can to get with the times and improove their formulas to not to be left behing and still get the bashing of hundreds of people... How come this series gets away with it? it has been just 8 years to make me want to vomit.

    So adding a new manu layout changes nothing, not even adding a strategy map is called innovation.

    But what about the online? that's what the game is about right? well no if I'm paying a sick high ammount of money just to struggle to play with someone decent, I don't even know where most of these people actually got any kind of education, in the jungle?    … Expand
  11. GratefulRob
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    Yeahhh. This game really needed to be more advanced. Just the same old dribble another time around.
    It's a shame they don't even try improving it. The multiplayer is as always. The story is ridiculous. The only thing they improved was a way for them to make more money on "elite". I'm almost positive map packs are going to be $20 now. I already feel ripped off for a reskinned MW2. Atleast    Yeahhh. This game really needed to be more advanced. Just the same old dribble another time around.
    It's a shame they don't even try improving it. The multiplayer is as always. The story is ridiculous. The only thing they improved was a way for them to make more money on "elite". I'm almost positive map packs are going to be $20 now. I already feel ripped off for a reskinned MW2. Atleast battlefront bc3 and dice took a risk with more vehicles and a new game engine. These guys did nothing. I am going to trade this in before i get to deep in the money trap which is Activision.    … Expand
  12. Pgstyle
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    Major dissapointment. Agree with everyone else, this game is MW2 with minor additions. Elite is an absolute mess that simply doesn't work, never can login and do anything. I think Infinity ward have lost it, Treyarch are the way forward for Call of Duty now.
  13. Sidjustice
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    I'm pretty sure all this was a complete misunderstanding. Infinity must have printed the new graphics of the real mw3 on old copies of mw2 they had laying around. Who knows maybe they ask for our addresses and send us the actually mw3 with an IOU 60 bucks
  14. Ultion
    Nov 21, 2011
    0
    Modern warfare 2.5 is this games real title, with reused models from MW2, no innovation, and a fan-base of foaming at the mouth rabid children. The singleplayer is so scripted (badly!) that there's no room for choice anywhere. The multiplayer is a fast paced, trigger happy mess, with every accomplishment met with a metal chord, like a pedophile offering a kid sweets... sickening stuff. IfModern warfare 2.5 is this games real title, with reused models from MW2, no innovation, and a fan-base of foaming at the mouth rabid children. The singleplayer is so scripted (badly!) that there's no room for choice anywhere. The multiplayer is a fast paced, trigger happy mess, with every accomplishment met with a metal chord, like a pedophile offering a kid sweets... sickening stuff. If you bought this game, trade it in straight away or use it as a Frisbee, you'll find your self a lot happier.… Expand
  15. Lambdaboy_ro
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    Welcome to the Madden of fps! ( TRUE!) This is a expansion pack no a game!
    It's just like The Groundhog Day FPS. It's sad . Maybe this game will be a Best seller, COD saga it's just like Saw saga the same **** over and over.
  16. rock2k12
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    Infinity Ward and Sledghammer have proved one thing and one thing only. They are good at copying and pasting. I need to hire them to write one of my college papers only to be expelled from school becasue of plagerism. Mw3 is some complete trash, from the starting credits to the ending credits. There is absolutely nothing that seperates it from previous COD tltles. Graphics, guns, gameplay,Infinity Ward and Sledghammer have proved one thing and one thing only. They are good at copying and pasting. I need to hire them to write one of my college papers only to be expelled from school becasue of plagerism. Mw3 is some complete trash, from the starting credits to the ending credits. There is absolutely nothing that seperates it from previous COD tltles. Graphics, guns, gameplay, 12 year olds, all the exact same. Save your money and time and buy battlefield 3. Much better game. The sales just don't show it because of this overhyped piece of **** called COD.… Expand
  17. Levanders
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3.... I hope everyone enjoys $60.00 map packs. CoD has become so generic it's not even fun or worth it to buy the newest version. It sits in the same boat as Madden, the developers feel the need to re-make the game every year in an attempt to maximize profits. Call of Duty died for me after Call of Duty 4.
  18. Winter_Deathpaw
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. So i got this game on release date and i am very shocked at how well this game came out. From the epic single player campaign to the awesome multiplayer and spec ops. The gun play has been balanced and so have the nobtubes and rockets and all the explosives. The new packages offer a wide variety of gameplay to the super "lone wolf" to the team- based player. The maps feel like modern warfare maps with the firefights usually occuring in houses and open ground and snipers now have a better chance at long range gameplay. No gun is overpowered since i have used all of them and kick butt with all of them equally. The elite package is an awesome upgrade to the game allowing you to see all of your games played and where you died and by who and by what gun. ELite TV is freaking amazing telling you how to play each map for certain types of game modes and how to use each gun with very specific details. The new killstreaks are super awesome. Nothing better then walking around with a recon juggernaut and just being a total tank. The specialist package is freaking amazing and is totally worth playing it if your a super lone wolf (25 kills with specialist package gives you a nuke)… Expand
  19. bubsy54
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    This is hands down the worst Call of Duty game I have ever played. It was one of the worst games in general. Forget the facts that the game hasn't changed much since CoD4, the game itself is not very good.

    the game doesn't improve on the most important points the hit detection is awful, the spawn points are even worse the online system is all the same....what? different care packages?    This is hands down the worst Call of Duty game I have ever played. It was one of the worst games in general. Forget the facts that the game hasn't changed much since CoD4, the game itself is not very good.

    the game doesn't improve on the most important points

    the hit detection is awful, the spawn points are even worse

    the online system is all the same....what? different care packages? different guns that act similar to guns from games past? come on.....we need more than that

    how about revamping the whole online system...change how we respawn,im tired of the 15 sec system respawn time..change the hit detection, gives us a deeper level of playing, not more customizable options...things need changing and this game does not do it    … Expand
  20. ktannen
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    A step sideways for FPS and the series. I found the gameplay to be much the same as previous MW games while the maps were less fun and worse designed. I would not recommend this game, and would suggest to those interested in the COD experience to pick up MW1 or MW2 for a better time.
  21. grapehead510
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    This game is garbage, I wanted to like it but I returned it because I can buy MW2 for a lot less. I can't believe all the review sites that are seemingly getting paid off to give it good reviews. At least we the people can speak the truth!
  22. darkroot
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    This map pack was pretty good in terms of content but not in price. $60? That's like a new game with just a few new maps and kill-streaks. Should of been priced at $30 maximum.
  23. Bamaballer256
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    This game is an utter disappointment. First off, they need to change the title from "Modern Warfare 3" to "Modern Warfare 2.5". This is basically a $60 DLC for an already stale game. Call of Duty 4 was the greatest game of the series...everything after has been downhill. What Sledgehammer admitted to doing with the MP was probably the worst thing TO ME that could've been done. TheyThis game is an utter disappointment. First off, they need to change the title from "Modern Warfare 3" to "Modern Warfare 2.5". This is basically a $60 DLC for an already stale game. Call of Duty 4 was the greatest game of the series...everything after has been downhill. What Sledgehammer admitted to doing with the MP was probably the worst thing TO ME that could've been done. They intentionally removed Sniper Maps in order to eliminate "camping". Why put in Sniper classes if we are not able to properly use them? I love to Run-n-Gun, but I also like to Snipe on certain maps. To pay $60 for a game and then basically to be told how to play it is pathetic. This is ridiculous, as Snipers are not "Run-n-Gunners". Sledgehammer also encourages people to "Quickscope", which is a major disappointment. This was a huge problem with past CODs, and for them to ENCOURAGE this is really sad. There are many issues with MP that need to be fixed, but Sledgehammer/Activision pretty much could care less since they already have everyone's money that purchased this game. This game doesn't even provide anything new. Everything looks the same and plays the same, with the exception of the sound. The weapons and explosions in this game sound cheap and dull...not even my Turtlebeach Headset could make it sound better. I am glad I bought Battlefield 3, although it has some issues that need to be addressed, but at least Dice acknowledges them and are fixing them. I hate you Activision for what you have done, and I really hate Sledgehammer for killing the COD game by taking out certain maps and encouraging that gay ass quickscoping. You guys suck and so does this game. I am one of CODs biggest fans, and I am sad to say, that this game sucks! Save your money and buy Skyrim.… Expand
  24. BBBevol
    Nov 18, 2011
    0
    I did not think that Activision could stoop any lower, but low and behold they did. I can't believe I was suckered again. First Black Ops now this. This is why there should be industry standards in video games. Publishers should be held accountable for shotty work getting released.

    First off, this game is broken from the get-go. Elite doesn't work, frame rate drops, horrible lag    I did not think that Activision could stoop any lower, but low and behold they did. I can't believe I was suckered again. First Black Ops now this. This is why there should be industry standards in video games. Publishers should be held accountable for shotty work getting released.

    First off, this game is broken from the get-go. Elite doesn't work, frame rate drops, horrible lag compensation, broken match making. I wonder who does the QA for Sledgehammer Game's apparently it's a bunch of Chimpanzee's smashing a keyboard, that's who.

    If I could give this game a score lower than zero, I would.    … Expand
  25. LeonShepard
    Nov 19, 2011
    0
    Other than a few memorable moments there's little positive that can be said about this game. Singleplayer is where the 2 positives lay with the fight on the bridge in Paris and the way in which Makarov is killed, graphically the game is little to no improvement over 4 which was released way back in 2007. And MP is tragic. There's nothing positive to be said about this. A game where you canOther than a few memorable moments there's little positive that can be said about this game. Singleplayer is where the 2 positives lay with the fight on the bridge in Paris and the way in which Makarov is killed, graphically the game is little to no improvement over 4 which was released way back in 2007. And MP is tragic. There's nothing positive to be said about this. A game where you can shoot people through solid walls, kill someone with a knife from 5 or 6 feet away, but can;t kill someone with a predator missile because they happen to be sitting under a table umbrella is broken as far as I'm concerned. The maps have been created to combat campers but now instead of campers you've got gamers running wild with SMG's and you're constantly being shot in the back. And being shot in the back is probably the only consistent thing in the game seeing as how the weapon damage lacks consistency the way Ethiopia lacks nutrition. In the 14 years I've been gaming I don't recall ever playing such a half-arsed sequel as this. The fact this game made 700 million in 5 days just goes to show what power marketing truely is, because it sure as hell didn't make 700 million because it's a good game.… Expand
  26. Ctopher425
    Nov 19, 2011
    0
    I know I'm probably jumping on the band wagon here, but I just can't believe this game was actually published. It seems as though no one put any insite into this game whatsoever. All the bang for your buck just was and repeat.
  27. tyman333
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    I remember me playing MW1, frankly it was awesome, there were plenty of innovations and of course picturesque graphics (for those times). But next chapters of CoD weren't so innovative or captivating. I give 0 out of 10 becouse there is nothing new in the game, the same mechanics, awful sound effects and silly story line. I believe MW3 is a piece of horse's **** and I don't understand whyI remember me playing MW1, frankly it was awesome, there were plenty of innovations and of course picturesque graphics (for those times). But next chapters of CoD weren't so innovative or captivating. I give 0 out of 10 becouse there is nothing new in the game, the same mechanics, awful sound effects and silly story line. I believe MW3 is a piece of horse's **** and I don't understand why do people still buy it.… Expand
  28. kotwr424
    Nov 24, 2011
    0
    We as gamer's got hussled this is by far the worst out of all the Call of Duty games to bare its title, Yes even worse than CoD 3, how this game got released is beyond me. Mutliplayer seems to suffer from its same terrible lantency issues that make it a frustrating piece of garbage, i'm Saddened I bought this game even more upset that this company is selling a product for so much cash andWe as gamer's got hussled this is by far the worst out of all the Call of Duty games to bare its title, Yes even worse than CoD 3, how this game got released is beyond me. Mutliplayer seems to suffer from its same terrible lantency issues that make it a frustrating piece of garbage, i'm Saddened I bought this game even more upset that this company is selling a product for so much cash and more people feed the machine, FPS's this year have but nothing short of a disappointment and let's face it the genre is dying a slow death. Maybe i'm getting to old for these types of games but I remember the golden days of FPS shooter's were actually skill would trump someone with host.… Expand
  29. kataang0101
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    I must say, the lads at Activision are simply brilliant. Figuring out a way to make schmucks pay $60 for a game that came out 4 years ago. Not only that, they are able to repeat year in, year out. It's the same game so expect the same noob tubing, cheap knife kills from 20 feet across the room, lack of vehicles, crap graphics and everything else that accompanies every CoD game.
  30. Neospider
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    There is a possibility this game is killing the game industry. If there is no other way, I want to show my disagreement this way. I'm not a hater, I have played the game and it's indeed horrible, compared to only slightly better rated games like Rage. The critics rating it as amazing and one of the best games are just trying to make the 20 million fans happy. It's the same as previous 3There is a possibility this game is killing the game industry. If there is no other way, I want to show my disagreement this way. I'm not a hater, I have played the game and it's indeed horrible, compared to only slightly better rated games like Rage. The critics rating it as amazing and one of the best games are just trying to make the 20 million fans happy. It's the same as previous 3 instalments and fans are going to love it is not a review. It's giving fans what they want. If a game that sells tens of millions of copies changes only aesthetically and still gets great reviews, what is the worth of innovation? Why are we even playing new games. Let's pay a monthly fee like in WoW and receive regular updates for next 10 years, ocasionally paying full price for big updates. That would at least not pretend to be a new game every time and suck as much money and even more time out of gamers. That is how we like our shooters, right? Why play something fun when you can get the same feeling from handing out headshots again and again, defeating all those noobs and prooving who's the man.… Expand
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 »