Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

 Xbox 360
User Score
3.5

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 8685 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2,253 out of 8685
  2. Mixed: 954 out of 8685
  3. Negative: 5,478 out of 8685
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. bmartin717
    Nov 21, 2011
    4
    I was a huge Call of Duty fan when the first one came out. Call of Duty 2 was the first game i owned for the xbox 360 and provided many great hours of fun. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is still one of my favorite games ever and when my friends and I LAN together this is still our shooter of choice. Since then the games have gotten not only not innovated but have gotten worse. The lack ofI was a huge Call of Duty fan when the first one came out. Call of Duty 2 was the first game i owned for the xbox 360 and provided many great hours of fun. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is still one of my favorite games ever and when my friends and I LAN together this is still our shooter of choice. Since then the games have gotten not only not innovated but have gotten worse. The lack of dedicated servers is a huge downgrade for this game. All the added perks and care packages and all that turned this amazing shooter into a joke of a game. Yes the game still has tight controls and good enough graphics but the series is headed in the wrong direction very quickly.… Expand
  2. Ardilla
    Nov 14, 2011
    4
    I have a hard time giving this game a high score based on the fact that it is the same as the previous games just done better. Yes, the graphics are smoothed out and add a lot to the mood of the maps. Yes, it has a more in depth perk/upgrade/leveling system. Yes, the weapons feel more real with scope sway, more recoil and less shots to kill your enemy. Yes, they took the best from allI have a hard time giving this game a high score based on the fact that it is the same as the previous games just done better. Yes, the graphics are smoothed out and add a lot to the mood of the maps. Yes, it has a more in depth perk/upgrade/leveling system. Yes, the weapons feel more real with scope sway, more recoil and less shots to kill your enemy. Yes, they took the best from all the MW games and combined it into one, but it is exactly that, the Voltron of MW games. If you like the MW games and looking for something a drastically new, then your looking in the wrong place. If you are looking for something that is the same just better then you are looking for this game. I can't give it a high score because of it being more of the same, but I can say you will enjoy this if you like the other games and you weren't looking for anything ground breaking.… Expand
  3. MikeVLC
    Nov 14, 2011
    4
    dont improve MW2 graphics,
    worse lag than Black Ops,
    Black Ops is more solid in online, maps are logical and menus, perks and weapons are more confortable to use. West and Zampella abandoned Infinity Ward and this MW3 we show that the genius of ModernWarfare are out, now they are working in EA . At the end he only one that lose are the gamers, the industry dont improve MW3 is not much    dont improve MW2 graphics,
    worse lag than Black Ops,
    Black Ops is more solid in online, maps are logical and menus, perks and weapons are more confortable to use.
    West and Zampella abandoned Infinity Ward and this MW3 we show that the genius of ModernWarfare are out, now they are working in EA
    . At the end he only one that lose are the gamers, the industry dont improve MW3 is not much better than MW2    … Expand
  4. MusicaX79
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    when I started playing the game the first thought I had was "this is the same engine as modern warfare 2." as the story progressed I found myself asking where in this campaign is there a level that I would want to play again and again. In both modern warfare 1 and 2 there were levels I just wanted to play over and over. But this time I would probably only play the campaign to getwhen I started playing the game the first thought I had was "this is the same engine as modern warfare 2." as the story progressed I found myself asking where in this campaign is there a level that I would want to play again and again. In both modern warfare 1 and 2 there were levels I just wanted to play over and over. But this time I would probably only play the campaign to get achievements at most. There is nothing new to the campaign besides awesome weapons. The story is short about 4-6 hours on normal at most. And what little story there is, it is just a reboot of the combined ideas of modern warfare 1 and 2. I had no "wow" moment I had more of a "here we go again". For the campaign the gameplay is the same but the story is old and feels like a reboot. The multiplayer has become more "balanced" or as I like to call it become more "unrealistic". Shotguns are now pea shoots at most. And the multiplayer is mostly the same as modern warfare 2. The addition of survival adds a lot of fun but getting stuck with the guy who leaves his post to take your kills and results in you getting flanked by the enemy gets old fast. Survival is enjoyable but it does not allow you the customization nor the number of guns that you can get in multiplayer. As a result it feels unfinished and not as enjoyable as it could have been. Spec ops is back with no difference what so ever to modern warfare 2. All and all the campaign is a disappoint; as it brings nothing new to the table, same with both the multiplayer and spec ops. The only thing remotely new is survival and that is incomplete. All I can say is congrats Activision on sucking the life out of another great game.… Expand
  5. remy87
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    Everyone has stated the obvious-Graphics are EXACTLY the same, story is boring, gameplay is the same... no real innovations whatsoever. This game to me has only become good when playing with a group of friends. It's sickening to see someone coming around a corner, aim down your sights and shoot them only to be killed by them, then when watching the kill cam it shows that apparantly theyEveryone has stated the obvious-Graphics are EXACTLY the same, story is boring, gameplay is the same... no real innovations whatsoever. This game to me has only become good when playing with a group of friends. It's sickening to see someone coming around a corner, aim down your sights and shoot them only to be killed by them, then when watching the kill cam it shows that apparantly they got a 5 shot head start on you. Or being shot at, running behind a wall, only to die from delayed and horrible hit detection. In MW I feel as if I should always bring a knife to a gun battle, it's ridiculous attempting to kill someone who is even remotely close to you, cuz all you'll see is a quick movement and then... death... a knife kill from 5 feet away... ask somebody in the military, if you're 5 feet away from someone, in order to "knife" them you'd have to lunge at them... unrealistic knifing. If you want to knife someone in MW then they need to add a struggle system, make people work to get knife kills just like we have to do with guns. How about this sweet flaw that has yet to be fixed: I die... I spawn and take 7 steps before being killed from behind... How about setting up designated spawn areas for both teams with NO spawn camping, hell if u need to, add turrets near each spawn that kill any enemy trying to camp around them, point is, get rid of spawn camping and get rid of enemies spawning behind us for easy kills! This game is frustrating on so many levels. I am in no way an elite player, but I consider myself a really good player, however, if you play with random people who know all the camping spots and know the hit detection and auto-aim really well, you will literally be destroyed and made to look like an amateur. Battlefield 3 is my game of choice between the two. I can play Battlefield with friends and myself, but MW3 is a game I only group up with friends for, that way, when I start getting pissed, somebody can crack a joke and keep the mood fun. So my suggestion, if you havent given BF3 a chance, go out and do so. The aiming is better, the maps are better, and skill truly shows in that game. In BF3 my KD is a 2.7 and I run and gun, in MW3 I am a 1.37.… Expand
  6. Chronickaos
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    this call of duty feels no different from the others. The graphics are no better than mw2 and the online play is nothing special. Of course they have a couple new guns and perks but over all its pretty much the same. Its almost like paying 60 bucks for a new multiplayer map pack for mw2. But there is one this about this game that i do find exceptionally fun and new which is the gamethis call of duty feels no different from the others. The graphics are no better than mw2 and the online play is nothing special. Of course they have a couple new guns and perks but over all its pretty much the same. Its almost like paying 60 bucks for a new multiplayer map pack for mw2. But there is one this about this game that i do find exceptionally fun and new which is the game survival mode. Again its nothing to blow the roof off with but it is challenging and is fun. but its one of those things after you play for a while youll get bored of it. so i wouldn't waster your money on buying this game. Just stick with black ops your not missing anything.… Expand
  7. GhekoWaR
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    This is by no means a great game. The single player is ok but nothing new but no one buys it for the campaign. The multiplayer is even more broken than Black Ops. Hit markers are awful and the games revolve around least lag wins. The maps are small and uninteresting with too much clutter to camp around in. Kill/confirm is a good game mode but all the games problems ruin the experience.This is by no means a great game. The single player is ok but nothing new but no one buys it for the campaign. The multiplayer is even more broken than Black Ops. Hit markers are awful and the games revolve around least lag wins. The maps are small and uninteresting with too much clutter to camp around in. Kill/confirm is a good game mode but all the games problems ruin the experience. Even when having a really good round I dont get the same enjoyment as I did in BO's as I assume my lag was less than my opponents. I have not even gone into theatre mode as nothing in any of my games has made me want to review it, which is a shame as i spent hours in BO's making cool videos to show friends on-line. It feels as though we have been sold MW2 with Black Op's online issues and as they never fixed BO's they will probably never fix this. Pity.… Expand
  8. Sageofprofessio
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    After watching this game for a while and looking at all the hype, I finally decided to join my University's Games Club for the midnight release. When I got the game and instantly hopped onto it, I got what I expected, the same experience from all the other Call of Duty games I have come to enjoy. What I am disappointed in is the fact that this Game felt more like a content pack than a fullAfter watching this game for a while and looking at all the hype, I finally decided to join my University's Games Club for the midnight release. When I got the game and instantly hopped onto it, I got what I expected, the same experience from all the other Call of Duty games I have come to enjoy. What I am disappointed in is the fact that this Game felt more like a content pack than a full game. I feel like I've just wasted $40 on a bit of reskinning, a couple new weapons and attachments, a recycled story concept, and some original multiplayer maps maps. While the game is fun to play, and shares the same addictivity as the other games in the series, I found that it felt dated in both the gameplay and presentation departments. There were no new additions to the multiplayer system, aside from the two types of kill streaks, and a game mode literally ripped from Halo Reach's headhunter mode. Initially I thought that the Weapons Proficiencies were a good idea, it took me about 2 minutes to realize that it was simply the MW1 and MW2 weapons systems simply retooled, tweaked and given a nice sugar glaze coat for the public. The graphics, while they are sill good, are dated. While activision manages to keep the framerate steady at XX fps (whatever it is), it appears that they sacrificed the overal model texturing and antiailiasing, instead relying upon epic moments to make up for graphics deficiencies. Overall, while I do like the game, it's lack of innovations and recycled elements detract from the "bang for your buck" value of the $60 purchase, leaving something that feels like it would have fit better in a $30 DLC or expansion pack.… Expand
  9. Krankstar2K
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    Why a 4 .. The multiplayer is said to be all the best put together , however in comparisson to MW2 the levels feel very generic . What happened to awesome levels like Terminal , Estate , Afghan .. pretty much all the MW2 lvls without the expansions were pretty great .. they had places to hide and be "tactical".. MW3 maps are trash , not fun .. they all have the same feel .. everything hasWhy a 4 .. The multiplayer is said to be all the best put together , however in comparisson to MW2 the levels feel very generic . What happened to awesome levels like Terminal , Estate , Afghan .. pretty much all the MW2 lvls without the expansions were pretty great .. they had places to hide and be "tactical".. MW3 maps are trash , not fun .. they all have the same feel .. everything has invisible walls .. even bushes. This game really just feels like a expansion with tweaked multiplayer. I spent alot of time on MW2 , and even WaW and BOps , however am having a very difficult time forcing myself to play it. The single player is of course sort of neat .. but mainly only because of the special wow moments of the destuction happening in the background such as the falling of the eiffel tower. None of course is really interactive. The rest of the game is just shoot and take down a swarm of unrealistic AI enemies which are set to come when your player reaches a point or until to reach a set point to make them stop and continue with the story. Then as if a 60 Dollar price tag wasnt enough .. you can purchase a 50 dollar 1 year membership to basically get the expansions when games like Battlefield will have the first expansion and its free which is releasing in December. So just for the basic version plan on dishing out 110.00 Bucks to play everything. Modern Warfare 3 is a okay game .. however you can see the difference in quality from when Infinity Ward was truley a sole company and when the leftover Infinity Ward and SledgeHammer games get toghether and put out a "sequel"… Expand
  10. ZombieRobot
    Mar 18, 2022
    4
    Honestly there is nothing new to this game. It plays exactly the same as all the previous Call of Duty games since Modern Warfare 1. The graphics are the same, the sound is the same, and worst of all the game play is exactly the same.
  11. tatr76
    Nov 17, 2011
    4
    Some nice ideas added but again to many problems drown this out. Matchmaking a joke on Xbox. Signed up to elite though still waiting to log on, too much traffic. Really just a big map pack.
  12. lintmaster
    Mar 9, 2012
    4
    I was a BIG fan of cod4 and mw2 but the shine has definitely worn off for me with mw3. Pretty much everything felt the same as the previous COD games. The kill animations were still rag doll, the same sounds, the same non-destructable environments with the same measly amount of environmental bullet damage. How cool could it have been to pull out your light machine gun and totally shred theI was a BIG fan of cod4 and mw2 but the shine has definitely worn off for me with mw3. Pretty much everything felt the same as the previous COD games. The kill animations were still rag doll, the same sounds, the same non-destructable environments with the same measly amount of environmental bullet damage. How cool could it have been to pull out your light machine gun and totally shred the environment? Instead we have same same superficial bullet holes that guns made back in COD4. How cool would it have been to have dynamic environments? You air strike a building and then have 3 different types of rubbled building that would appear in its place for the remainder of the game. How cool would it have been to shoot somebody and have them fall off a ledge and come crashing down with a THUMP in a cloud of dust or nail them with a shotgun and have them fly backwards crashing into a table or wall? But no, we're stuck with the same old 1997 animations.

    The maps were probably the biggest disappointment. There wasn't one pure sniper map in the game (nothing even close to wasteland, afghan, or derail). The maps didn't seem to cater to team games (having your team pinned down in a firefight with the other team); they were all just run around solo and get shot in the back. In cod4 especially, it seemed like there was a sense of friendly and enemy territory and I found myself respawning with my team who were engaged in battle a lot. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that everyone got UAV so there was a better sense of where the enemy was. IDK, i'm starting to ramble...

    In short, I just thought they needed to innovate more instead of relying on the same old engine.    … Expand
  13. albert_h_1982
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    the game is ok...at best. nothing spectacular. they could have done a better job.campaign and spec op are the ok i guess and multiplayer well mw2 and black ops are a hell of alot better. you cant go into half of the buildings, the maps arent that great, you cant hide in the shrubs and bushes like in mw2, . all cod that they have made got better than the last one but this one,, well i dontthe game is ok...at best. nothing spectacular. they could have done a better job.campaign and spec op are the ok i guess and multiplayer well mw2 and black ops are a hell of alot better. you cant go into half of the buildings, the maps arent that great, you cant hide in the shrubs and bushes like in mw2, . all cod that they have made got better than the last one but this one,, well i dont know what they were trying to do. the game is mainly for people who like to run around, so campers this in not really for you. they should have put more places to hide. like in real life. you just wouldnt go run around holdine dual weapons in a real scenario would you, they should of made it for campers non campers and those in between. the guns are not all that, some of the perks and packages are ok nothing great, i will keep playing the game because i bought it but i will see how long i can go on playing a game like this, its ok. its not great and its not that horrible where i would play a sports game instead of it. yall could of did alot better...mw2 and black ops gameplay is better, black ops is better than both of these games combined… Expand
  14. promethus
    Nov 18, 2011
    4
    This year, even more so than last I have been extremely let down by COD. The maps are so poorly constructed that at you are open to attack from several angles AT ALL TIMEs due to the abundance of tight corners and back passages. This forces you to roll in a pack and or get gunned down as soon as you let off a round exposing your position. I realsie they did this to stop camping but itsThis year, even more so than last I have been extremely let down by COD. The maps are so poorly constructed that at you are open to attack from several angles AT ALL TIMEs due to the abundance of tight corners and back passages. This forces you to roll in a pack and or get gunned down as soon as you let off a round exposing your position. I realsie they did this to stop camping but its merely does this at the cost of playablity. You basically find yourself FORCED to roll with a pack of noobish amauters mindlesy avenging the death of d guy next to you while your enemy does the same. IT JUST ONE BIG CLUSTER **** like me you play alone this is doubly anoying as you want to go your own way but realsie this means at best getting one kill before being shot in the back. Infinity Ward have apparently suufered the loss of several key members of their team causing them to bring in Sledgehammer Games to compensate. They Failed!… Expand
  15. Indokane
    Nov 18, 2011
    4
    THIS REVIEW IS STRICTLY BASED ON THE MULTI-PLAYER ASPECT: Outside of new maps and a few new perks and guns this game is pretty much like all the others. Some big key points is like Black Ops they lack proper servers. Their ability to balance is lacking bad. They went from grenades, claymores, and rockets of all forms from being over powered to being less than effective. AllTHIS REVIEW IS STRICTLY BASED ON THE MULTI-PLAYER ASPECT: Outside of new maps and a few new perks and guns this game is pretty much like all the others. Some big key points is like Black Ops they lack proper servers. Their ability to balance is lacking bad. They went from grenades, claymores, and rockets of all forms from being over powered to being less than effective. All they had to do was take away the extra explosive damage perks and it would have been fine. Certain perks and heartbeat sensors and knifing still beats a gun add an unrealistic feel to the game. If they wanted to take this game to the next level they should have teamed up with Bungie and added the vehicle element to the game on multi-player. The knifing mechanic should be like battlefield where you have to sneek up on them and knife them in the back. Seriously how would a person getting drilled with bullets while running at them still have the force to knife someone. You might as well add the halo sword into the game.… Expand
  16. crushilista
    Nov 19, 2011
    4
    What do you get when you take a great thing, dilute the hell out of it over the series of about 3 more games, then charge for it the same price as the original great? MW3. I give this a four and not a zero because a zero is just kind of ridiculous. If a game starts up at all, it at least deserves a one. The main reason this gets a four is, it's not just kicking a dead horse, it's kickingWhat do you get when you take a great thing, dilute the hell out of it over the series of about 3 more games, then charge for it the same price as the original great? MW3. I give this a four and not a zero because a zero is just kind of ridiculous. If a game starts up at all, it at least deserves a one. The main reason this gets a four is, it's not just kicking a dead horse, it's kicking it's ashes at this point.… Expand
  17. ShowBaggs
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    Infinity Ward have taken a backwards step after Black Ops. Treyarch took a step in the right direction by adding COD points and eliminating Quickscoping. IW has created a circus for children with the ridiculous ways to which u can 'snipe' in this game. Sniping used to be a skill from range, not a few quick clicks of a trigger from 2 meters away. The graphics can be excused as nobodyInfinity Ward have taken a backwards step after Black Ops. Treyarch took a step in the right direction by adding COD points and eliminating Quickscoping. IW has created a circus for children with the ridiculous ways to which u can 'snipe' in this game. Sniping used to be a skill from range, not a few quick clicks of a trigger from 2 meters away. The graphics can be excused as nobody expected anything more than black ops. The Audio is so poorly mixed, my ASTRO A40's sound like a cheap pair of Turtle Beach XLC's. Black Ops had varied recoil pending on different gun types, MW3 has next to no difference in gun types. Weapon perks are the stupidest things implemented in a game since the Wii remote. An MP5 only shoots so far, why add something to allow it to shoot further? Kill streaks used to be just that - KILL streaks. Even the worst player can get a spy plane on COD4/BOp's, it's only 3 kills. Now U can only capture a few objectives and you've gained reward. This makes sense, but if you die, this should reset. COD 4 redifined innovation and took the world by storm. MW2 was a mistake that the world could've done without and MW3 is the icing on the cake for IW and the reverse of progress. Treyarch got it right, in evey way. IW had sat back in their gold office chairs and smoked some mind altering drug and produced nothing but rubbish. In summary, too many kill streaks, dumb weapon perks, sniping is a joke, matchmaking is stupid and it's designed for 12 year olds. We would've been happy with COD 4 expansion instead of this over-hyped tragidy.… Expand
  18. Draco705
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    I've gotta say, I'm pretty disappointed in MW3. Yes, they kept a lot of the formula that everyone likes, but that's not all there is to the game. Yes, the visuals are crisp and clean. Yes, the soundtrack is well done. Yes, the campaign has a good story. But still, it's the same thing over, and over, since everyone realized what Call of Duty was. It's getting tiring of the same old stuff.I've gotta say, I'm pretty disappointed in MW3. Yes, they kept a lot of the formula that everyone likes, but that's not all there is to the game. Yes, the visuals are crisp and clean. Yes, the soundtrack is well done. Yes, the campaign has a good story. But still, it's the same thing over, and over, since everyone realized what Call of Duty was. It's getting tiring of the same old stuff. Activision needs to take it to a new level and maybe pick a new era to play in.… Expand
  19. Dark_Knight1990
    Nov 20, 2011
    4
    I have been a longtime fan of the Call of Duty franchise but this particular game has really disappointed me. I feel like Activision is just milking the franchise for all it is worth and killing it in the process. The formula for Campaign, Spec-Ops and Multiplayer are all the EXACT same as in previous iterations with the exception of the "new" survival mode. That new mode pits playersI have been a longtime fan of the Call of Duty franchise but this particular game has really disappointed me. I feel like Activision is just milking the franchise for all it is worth and killing it in the process. The formula for Campaign, Spec-Ops and Multiplayer are all the EXACT same as in previous iterations with the exception of the "new" survival mode. That new mode pits players against endless waves of AI. But hold on, they didn't even change the engine for Spec-Ops to allow for more than two people to play at once? Its shameful. The lack of innovation and change to one of my most beloved games has me questioning whether or not to buy the inevitable version next year. There is some fun to be had here, don't get me wrong. The multiplayer offers some fun times with friends, but its nothing you haven't seen before. The campaign provides a fitting, although predictable end to the story arc began in Call of Duty 4. These are the only saving graces to this otherwise unremarkable game however.… Expand
  20. sebastiannnn
    Nov 21, 2011
    4
    This game was a big dissapointment and very little thinking process went in the making of this game. Black Ops was Great and feel like something much more advance than mw3. they made a game that feels old and outdated. The maps are too small the weapons are way over powered and the kill feel cheap! There's not much stragedy to playing this game than just running around and gettingThis game was a big dissapointment and very little thinking process went in the making of this game. Black Ops was Great and feel like something much more advance than mw3. they made a game that feels old and outdated. The maps are too small the weapons are way over powered and the kill feel cheap! There's not much stragedy to playing this game than just running around and getting kills. the spawns are terrible and it feel like a little kids game. I play mw2 and black ops all the time but mw3 it a game that I have already gotten tired of and fixing sale it for something else. I really regret getting call of duty elite. It was a waste. I still are not giving up on the series just going to wait and see if next year they learn from their mistakes and come up with something that is more dignify of the call of duty name.… Expand
  21. Xbox360Critic
    Nov 21, 2011
    4
    MW3 had its work cut out trying to be half as good as its brother MW2 and it did not try as hard as it should have the multiplayer is not half as addicting as MW2 and gets boring after 1 to 2 hours of gameplay the maps are horrific and the campaign is twice as bad within five minutes it seems like you have been playing for hours. all in all it is a waste of £40 - Xbox360Critic
  22. Threepwood
    Nov 21, 2011
    4
    Imagine a year that Call of Duty hasn't been released, can you? Since 2007 the video game industry has been saturated with FPS's. So how does the newest addition to king of FPS's measure up, not well. I'd generally break a review down to the various components. With this game, however, there is no need. Sounds, animations (slow-mo death walk/crawls), and gameplay are all the same asImagine a year that Call of Duty hasn't been released, can you? Since 2007 the video game industry has been saturated with FPS's. So how does the newest addition to king of FPS's measure up, not well. I'd generally break a review down to the various components. With this game, however, there is no need. Sounds, animations (slow-mo death walk/crawls), and gameplay are all the same as previous entries.The campaign objectives become quite tedious and makes it feel pointless to even bother with. You want to become engrossed in the story but it never quite happens. 5 hours was all it took to complete the campaign, however you won't really want to play any longer. Spec ops is a little refreshing with the new survival mode but draws to much from other games to be original. You'll enjoy it for a while. Multiplayer is... do I even need to it again? It's the same.The most disturbing thing is the critics for the game have almost all given praise to this game. I believe this is a clear example of when the poeples opinion is more valid. If you've never played a Call of Duty before you'll enjoy it just as everyone their first time round. For vets this is the point where it's time to step down. This franchise really doesn't have mush left to offer. Let this be a lesson to publishers and developers who decide to milk their games dry.… Expand
  23. blubblubblub12
    Nov 21, 2011
    4
    to be honest i have not bought this game, but i went over to my friends house to try it out because i wasn't convinced i should buy it. i was really excited when i saw the opening videos, and when i was customizing my friends loadouts. after playing for 1 hour all my excitement was gone. i did not experience any balance issues or glitches. i didn't even experience any lag, but what i didto be honest i have not bought this game, but i went over to my friends house to try it out because i wasn't convinced i should buy it. i was really excited when i saw the opening videos, and when i was customizing my friends loadouts. after playing for 1 hour all my excitement was gone. i did not experience any balance issues or glitches. i didn't even experience any lag, but what i did experience was deja vu. it only took an hour for me to realize that i was playing the same game as black ops, as modern warfare 2, as world at war, as cod 4, and i will even go back as far as cod 2. It's the same game! the only big innovation the series has under it's belt is the perk system which made cod 4 one of the best multiplayer games i have ever played. zombies was introduced with waw but it isn't an innovation because it came out the same year that gears introduced horde mode. weapon customization also came with cod 4 but there have been other older franchises to use that in their games (example: socom series) once i got bored of multiplayer my friend and i played survival mode, which i really enjoyed. i feel like they did a good job on that, not an innovation but they definitely refined the horde gametype. there was some disappointment that came with survival mode though. i didn't understand why it was only 2 player, even on online co-op. zombies was 4 player, how come survival can't be 4 player as well? i wasn't a big fan of spec ops on mw 2, and they seemed very similar in mw 3. the last thing i was disappointed with was how short the campaign was, we beat in like 5 hours. we didn't even try to rush through it I'm sure someone could beat it under 5 hours which is sad. with how short the campaign was i feel like they should have cut it completely, along with the spec ops missions. instead they should have had a major focus on multiplayer. makes sense right? i mean they just came out with the elite service to track your stats. why even make singleplayer options? anyways i feel like with the focus on multiplayer they could have made survival 4 player co-op, and they could have added more multiplayer options such as guns, maps, camo, etc. but they will just make you spend $15 on that later. the only thing about this game that saved it from getting anything lower than a 4 is the fact that survival was fun. i think there needs to be a change in the cod formula. if activision read this they would think i'm crazy because economically it does not make sense, why change the formula for something that makes you billions of dollars? all i have to say is that they have lost my business and i will not buy another call of duty until they make some innovations. the only thing that can make that happen is competition. competition is excellent for the gaming industry, because it makes the consumer happy because developers are constantly trying to out due their counterpart. this leads to great games for consumers, and money circulating in the industry. every great dynasty has to fall, and eventually people will realize that $60 is a waste of money if it's basically the same game as last year. the same problem is happening with madden, people are starting to realize that there is no innovation with that game, and the game critics are finally showing it with their scores, and yet critics still rate call of duty games high...hmm. the last thing i will say is for the call of duty fanboys. insanity- when someone does the same thing over and over while expecting a different result.… Expand
  24. Zico001
    Nov 23, 2011
    4
    I'll preface this by stating that I was a COD lackey. MW and MW2 were gaming experiences I still relish to this day. Unfortunately I can't say the same about MW3. I am completely disappointed by the latest offering. With a franchise so ground breaking, it's a shame that the creativity process couldn't keep up. The story went from harrowing and exciting to predictable and cliche. The engineI'll preface this by stating that I was a COD lackey. MW and MW2 were gaming experiences I still relish to this day. Unfortunately I can't say the same about MW3. I am completely disappointed by the latest offering. With a franchise so ground breaking, it's a shame that the creativity process couldn't keep up. The story went from harrowing and exciting to predictable and cliche. The engine now feels stale. The multiplayer is where I encounter the biggest problems. The hit detection is atrocious to a point beyond frustration. It's no fun being killed when you're 5 feet around the corner. The spawning system is still laughable as I was easy pickings on many occasions. But my biggest gripe about this installment are the maps. Following up classic maps from MW and MW2 was going to be difficult but it feels like IW just didn't put forth the thought and effort into these. Yes they gave us a lot more maps but this is a classic case of quantity over quality. Many of the maps are breeding campers and hole up points. There are a few choke points but those few are really abused. All this just encourages you to avoid that part of the map hindering your overall experience. With these problems, the replay value takes a hit and I haven't played the game for over a week. A prestigious franchise as COD shouldn't be taking a backseat to other games but the lack of entertainment and innovation has forced me towards more enjoyable experiences such as Skyrim and Uncharted 3. I've even ventured back into Battlefield 3 to appease my FPS craving. It may not have the polish that MW3 has but I'm having a better time with it.… Expand
  25. JugtarOnionBaji
    Nov 24, 2011
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. MW3 is an awful game. Simple as that. After watching the MP briefing at CoD XP, i really believed that this latest instalment could, at least, breath life into this stale franchise. However, MW3 is merely a lazy, copy and paste effort of MW2. In fact, everything in MW3 is a massive expansion pack, which could easily have been added into its predecessor, with nothing new or innovative added.
    MW3's story picks up where MW2 left off with Captain John 'Soap' Mactavish fighting for his life after getting stabbed and left for dead and the continuation of the Russian invasion of the United States. Vladimir Makarov, the mastermind of the invasion, is still at large after his escape at the end of MW2 and the hunt for him takes you to various locations across the world from the East Coast of the US to mainland Europe and Africa as you view the conflict through the eyes of various characters.
    The game's presentation, while not terrible in anyway, is quite unremarkable. The game is identical to MW2, in terms of visuals and gameplay. You'll still get massive firefights and giant action set pieces but for those who've played previous titles in the series (which would be most of you) you will find nothing special. The voice acting, however, is generally very good with Billy Murray and Kevin McKidd putting in fantastic performances once again as the iconic protagonists Captain John Price and Captain Soap MacTavish. Craig Fairbrass, who voiced Gaz and Ghost in MW1 and 2 respectively, also returns to voice Sergeant Wallcroft of the British SAS (who had a minor role in MW1). However, much to my disappointment (and to the disappointment of others i'm sure), Fairbrass' role is extremely minimal compared to his previous roles. William Fichtner and Timothy Olyphant also put in decent performances as Delta Force operatives Sandman and Grinch. The soundtrack by Brian Tyler is also good, however it lacks that epic feel that Hans Zimmer expertly delivered with his score in MW2. However, Hans Zimmer is in a league of his own so to compare him with other composers is massively unfair.
    Gameplay in MW3 is frustratingly similar to past entries. Usually this involves things like fight your way towards destroying objectives to rescuing hostages to defending locations. Its become too familiar and doesnt represent a satisfying challenge. In fact I completed the SP campaign on veteran difficulty in 3 days with relative ease as the gameplay mechanics have become so overused to the point where it becomes so predictable. Spec ops returns and, as before, can be fun for a short while but there is no real reason to play multiple times once you get every star. Survival mode, a new mode in which you defend yourself from infinite waves of enemies, works just fine in MW3 but is hardly innovative as it has been seen in many other franchises. The MP is where the game really disappoints. Robert Bowling, community manager of Infinity Ward, promised that the MP was more balanced than before. This is true to some extent. Certain perks which overpowered players such as OMA and commando have been removed. Perks that gave players power advantages such as stopping power and danger close are also gone. Familiar perks such as Sleight of Hand and Steady Aim have been tweaked to allow pro variants that better complement and balance its base variant e.g. SoH Pro allows faster weapon swapping as opposed to faster aiming. Shotguns are thankfully primary weapons once more and the game ending nuke doesn't return. This means that there is more focus on gun on gun gameplay that relies more on skill than perks and less reliance on air support to do the work for you. However, the same frustrating problems still exist. For starters, the matchmaking system is awful as ever. Playing team games is an extremely frustrating affair as the same gung-ho, lone wolf style of play remains, where players care more about their KDR rather than playing the objective. Even with the new pointstreak system, where you are rewarded with points for taking out air support and capturing objectives as well as racking up kills, you will still find players who play solely for kills rather than objectives. Is it really that difficult to go to TDM to improve your KDR? Even in TDM you will find bad players who don't know they're doing and will often lose matches for you. Camping exists tenfold in all game modes, mainly due to the poor map design as well as the inclusion and abuse of the blind eye and assassin perks which render you immune to air support and recon devices. Stealth is perfectly fine but using it to camp is game breaking. The terrible spawn system, which has marred the last 2 titles, has returned along with the awful hit detection which makes for a frustrating experience overall. If you're looking for a rewarding shooter get Battlefield 3 instead or perhaps get Call of Duty 4 the last great CoD game    … Expand
  26. hokey73
    Nov 26, 2011
    4
    Every year, my anticipation of the new COD title being released keeps getting smaller and smaller. MW2 was a great game and I put hours and hours into it. Black Ops was so so, but it was a little different. This game, although it is pretty much a rehash of MW2, would be pretty fun except for a few things. The clan tag mods are way out of hand and should have been crushed a long timeEvery year, my anticipation of the new COD title being released keeps getting smaller and smaller. MW2 was a great game and I put hours and hours into it. Black Ops was so so, but it was a little different. This game, although it is pretty much a rehash of MW2, would be pretty fun except for a few things. The clan tag mods are way out of hand and should have been crushed a long time ago. I would rather see the often offensive player cards of BlackOps than this. There seems to be several other ways of cheating which I have seen videos of (i.e. 10th prestige on the second day after release). I can sort of deal with this things because they don't appear to be in every game. What I can't deal with is the lag compensation that this game uses. To be hit by one bullet and die, only to see you were showered in bullets on the kill cam is silly. Being behind cover on your screen and getting killed, only to see you hadn't made it to cover yet is ridiculous. BlackOps had this in it as well, but it was not so invasive. It was a little frustrating. In MW3, it seems to be running at full blast making for an incredibly frustrating game. Hopefully the founders of IW that Activision screwed over can be a new and exciting and well developed franchise with Respawn Entertainment. We can only cross our fingers and see!… Expand
  27. TheOnyxHero
    Nov 25, 2011
    4
    Modern Warfare 3 would be another great game to the collection, but seeing as I got the PC version, this game feels very lackluster and seems to fall short to it console brethren. The game's engine is dated, and it shows compared to games to come out recently such as Battlefield 3. The game play is very much the same, but I feel the gun vs gun is back in this year's game.

    The pit falls of    Modern Warfare 3 would be another great game to the collection, but seeing as I got the PC version, this game feels very lackluster and seems to fall short to it console brethren. The game's engine is dated, and it shows compared to games to come out recently such as Battlefield 3. The game play is very much the same, but I feel the gun vs gun is back in this year's game.

    The pit falls of the PC version though really trump could have been, the game doesn't even feel supported and seemed like the developers didn't care at all for PC gamers. To them we are all pirates and there is no $ in PC gaming. Which is funny, because I see that most games that are pirated first are console games.

    -Again, the PC version feels very dated and the textures are HORRIBLE. It sucks they didn't spruce it up at all for PC seeing as many of the gamers to get it have way better systems then the 5-6 year old consoles.

    - CoD Elite. They touted it and touted it. Where is the PC version? Why is PC being shafted with a stripped down version. It's ****

    - Dedicated servers. We go them, yay! ... But, they are all uranked? What. The. **** Why in god's name would I ever play a non-ranked server? The game, like all games now is the reward. I like gaining XP and unlocking guns, levels and prestiges... but removing them from dedicated server? Stupid.

    - IWnet/P2P. This was the major complaint for MW2 and it returns in MW3. Having to play with someone who gets host and an advantage and deal with lag, and change of hosts and no way to deal with any cheaters is horrible and not fun. In a twitch shooter, every ms counts. If I'm lagging, I am going to be in a bid disadvantage. What was wrong with me being able to play on a dedicated server that was located near me and I wasn't lagging. IWNet/P2P, It's why I didn't put much more time in MW2. My first game after buying it was into a hacked lobby. Black Ops had optimization problems with dual cores, but man it played the best out of all the CoDs I've played so far. And we had RANKED DEDICATED SERVERS.

    The single player was alright, but nothing memorable with it all. Same 'ol crap from the previous games.    … Expand
  28. MeNoChinese
    Nov 26, 2011
    4
    Why only give this game a 4/10 you ask? Because the multiplayer is stale, same feeling as MW2. Looks almost the same as too. Why not give it a 0/10? Because the singleplayer is the best since Big Red One or even Finest Hour. One of my favorite singleplayer games of all time. If this was a game made like Mass Effect or Fallout, where the singleplayer is king, this game would be a 8.5/10Why only give this game a 4/10 you ask? Because the multiplayer is stale, same feeling as MW2. Looks almost the same as too. Why not give it a 0/10? Because the singleplayer is the best since Big Red One or even Finest Hour. One of my favorite singleplayer games of all time. If this was a game made like Mass Effect or Fallout, where the singleplayer is king, this game would be a 8.5/10 (even though it's not a RPG etc.). Cod fanboys, cry your hearts out, but even you guys know this game was a flop. Ever remember what happened to Medal of Honor? That's about to happen to CoD if EA can finally square a couple of things away.… Expand
  29. gameon1973
    Nov 27, 2011
    4
    MW3 is a great game! As was MW2 before. And before that, MW1. There are some tweaks and changes, but basically it's the same game all over and over again. So unless you're into the short single player campaign, there's no reason to pick this one up if you own any of the previous in the series.
  30. Mediahog132
    Nov 27, 2011
    4
    The game was dead before it was born. The game engine was just updated a little, which is actually not updated at all, and everything they offered for multiplayer should have just been a massive $20 DLC for MW2. The muliplayer is just plain frustrating, the spawning is automatic and forces the player into the game, sometimes placing the player right in front of the enemy, and theThe game was dead before it was born. The game engine was just updated a little, which is actually not updated at all, and everything they offered for multiplayer should have just been a massive $20 DLC for MW2. The muliplayer is just plain frustrating, the spawning is automatic and forces the player into the game, sometimes placing the player right in front of the enemy, and the killsreaks and perks make the game enormously unbalanced. The only reason I am giving this game a 4/10 is because the campaign was magnificent and the Co-operative gameplay is addictive, but only for a few hours. I had rented this game for a month to try it out, I thought i might ask friends and family for it for Christmas because i wasn't willing to spend my own money for it, but now I don't think its worth their money either. For anyone that is going to buy it for the campaign, just watch the videos on youtube or rent it because $60 for a campaign isn't worth it. Now some people defend Call of Duty not having a new game engine because it is in a contract with Activision to release a game every year. That is completely absurd because if they don't realize it, the game switches developers every other year so two or three years is plenty of time to develop a better game engine, considering they say that the game engine has been updated, but is just isn't seen, I feel i am playing Call of Duty 4. Save yourself the money and go buy a better game, maybe even Battlefield 3, who knows.… Expand
  31. nubstix
    Nov 30, 2011
    4
    After buying this game I feel ripped off. The real value of this game is the multiplayer and it is dissapointing. My biggest gripe is the spawning- I think everyone has had this experience. Spawning twice in front of the same person that killed you-spawn again take 5 steps on a bouncing betty- spawn get a kill to only get killed from behind. The sound is also a another issue theAfter buying this game I feel ripped off. The real value of this game is the multiplayer and it is dissapointing. My biggest gripe is the spawning- I think everyone has had this experience. Spawning twice in front of the same person that killed you-spawn again take 5 steps on a bouncing betty- spawn get a kill to only get killed from behind. The sound is also a another issue the footsteps are so muffled that it seems like everyone has the dead silence perk on. It seems like the developers made every effort to slow the pace of the game down. -no unlimited running. longer weapon switches. Its a baby shooter not worth the money i paid for it… Expand
  32. TheGreatZepp
    Nov 30, 2011
    4
    This isn't one of those games you can't put down; this is one of those games you find yourself thinking of something to do so you can put it down even quicker.

    COD is all about mutiplayer, after all of 3 hours you've beat the campaign. It's been a few weeks now and 30 hours of online play but time hasn't improved my opinion of the game. Camping and getting shot in the back is what MW3 is    This isn't one of those games you can't put down; this is one of those games you find yourself thinking of something to do so you can put it down even quicker.

    COD is all about mutiplayer, after all of 3 hours you've beat the campaign. It's been a few weeks now and 30 hours of online play but time hasn't improved my opinion of the game. Camping and getting shot in the back is what MW3 is all about. Colors are washed out and the guns are unspectacular and all will one/two shot kill you from any range. The maps are a chaotic nightmare, prepare to streak (3 deaths, 4 kills, 4 deaths, 5 kills). You'll have a bunch of players run right out in front of you only to streak into the abundance of campers (lay in a sewer pipe with heartbeat sensor anyone) and your turn at bad luck by players coming out behind you. Low levels are a PITA, you get welcomed to the game by being absolutely punished by vets with all the attachments. If you make it through that tough spell there's a good chance you are ready to reap the rewards by turning off the game due to the fact you've already done it all. That's not to say the game doesn't have some fun opportunities. Mic up with 4-5 friends and you will run amuck through the maps. However if you're on the wrong side of that team you'll just find yourself grabbing your ankles. In the end MW3 is a good starting point for a game but misses all the small (see development time consuming) things that make a game great. We have been shown what game designers are capable of when they care, the depth and innovation that they can do when they want to (they make it painfully obvious they didn't care for MW3). Infinity Ward has had really four games starting with MW1 to really see what works and doesn't and tune and perfect the product, MW3 feels like a developer's first dive into the fps just throwing out what is already out there and not using any player feedback for development.    … Expand
  33. Shinoxic
    Dec 1, 2011
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Don't read into all the "Everyone who gives this game a zero is trolling!" crap. I only gave it a four because it still holds some semblance of a game. I've played Call of Duty since CoD 2 on the PC, and I have to say in comparison, MW3 has become Modern Warfail 2.5. The campaign is lackluster, the MP is absolutely ridiculous. I didn't feel anything when Price killed Makarov. And I was having more fun playing Cut the Rope on my phone than calling in boring and ridiculous kill streaks for the upteenth time.… Expand
  34. CosmicJonathan
    Dec 3, 2011
    4
    If you are interested in purchasing a game that strays from its predecessor in no way, shape, or form, then MW3 is the game for you. The story provides quite a cliche war experience, and the multiplayer remains unchanged in all ways of significance. Survivor mode is fun for a short period, and for this reason alone I give MW3 a 4 as opposed to a 0.

    The main problem I have with MW3 is    If you are interested in purchasing a game that strays from its predecessor in no way, shape, or form, then MW3 is the game for you. The story provides quite a cliche war experience, and the multiplayer remains unchanged in all ways of significance. Survivor mode is fun for a short period, and for this reason alone I give MW3 a 4 as opposed to a 0.

    The main problem I have with MW3 is its lack of evolution. Many bring forth the argument that "If you say its the same as MW2, then you should give it the same rating." IGN, Gamespot, and other websites seemingly deliver their reviews from that standpoint. They openly admit to the games lack of progression, yet they still praise it. That being said, none of them address the fact that a blatant refusal to evolve in the video game industry is something that should go punished. The absence of any technical change whatsoever to the game is something that should be highlighted and taken into vast consideration when reviewing this game. The fact that Activision released MW3 in this form is insulting to the intelligence of the populous. Do they not think that we know how much money they have made off of the franchise? Do they think that we won't notice if they release the same game, year after year? Do they really think we are that stupid? The answer, unfortunately, is yes. The developers will sit on their billions of dollars and continually put the bare minimum into each game every season. And unless reviews are written that shed light upon this fact, and unless the majority of the gamers come out and express their dissatisfaction, people will continue to buy into this manipulative franchise.    … Expand
  35. aSoldiersHavok
    Dec 3, 2011
    4
    Too many critics praise this game when honestly it feels like a DLC. Graphics and gameplay are the same. Just some new maps and a few new guns. Tweaked the killstreaks which was a plus and the campaign was good, but everything else feels like a $60 DLC.
  36. Benedire
    Dec 9, 2011
    4
    I've been a gamer for quite some time, and I have enjoyed past Call Of Duty games, but I must say that I would sincerely recommend not buying this game. Though I enjoyed the campaign and had some fun with the spec ops, I hated the multiplayer with a fiery passion. No, I'm not **** at the game, and no, I'm not just raging cause it seems like one gun kills me and I can't use it, but it seemsI've been a gamer for quite some time, and I have enjoyed past Call Of Duty games, but I must say that I would sincerely recommend not buying this game. Though I enjoyed the campaign and had some fun with the spec ops, I hated the multiplayer with a fiery passion. No, I'm not **** at the game, and no, I'm not just raging cause it seems like one gun kills me and I can't use it, but it seems as though IW and Sledge just wanted to throw out a quickly made game to make some serious bank. Now, I wouldn't define myself as a fanboy, simply because I enjoy any and all good games that come out, but take MW3, which was made one year after Black Ops, and compare it to Battlefield 3, which they spent 5 years making. There's no comparison at all. MW3 is not an improvement on any past CoD games. Am I saying Black Ops and MW2 were perfect? Hell no, but compared to MW3 they're amazing. Unless you only buy games for the single player take your money elsewhere and buy a better game, my recommendations, Skyrim or even Battlefield.… Expand
  37. jmag1k
    Dec 13, 2011
    4
    I'm very disappointed with this game, and it's entire franchise. I was a huge fan of Modern Warfare, and enjoyed MW2. I was appalled with the execution of Black Ops and the undeserved fame Treyarch received. Not only did they gain success off the backs of the dismissed Call of Duty founders, but they further propelled the franchise in the minds of the mundane to generated a billion dollarsI'm very disappointed with this game, and it's entire franchise. I was a huge fan of Modern Warfare, and enjoyed MW2. I was appalled with the execution of Black Ops and the undeserved fame Treyarch received. Not only did they gain success off the backs of the dismissed Call of Duty founders, but they further propelled the franchise in the minds of the mundane to generated a billion dollars for the largest flop in video game history. MW3 is just lame. I'm happy I got this game on discount because had I paid full price I'd be truly upset. I enjoyed Medal of Honor much more and BF3 simply blows it out of the water. There is no comparison to Battlefield 3.… Expand
  38. Spisker21
    Dec 15, 2011
    4
    wait isnt this supposed to be dlc for modern warfare 2? i thought theyy threw together a new map pack with renamed perks and reskined guns to keep us busy until they actually make something fresh and origional
  39. Special_Kay
    Dec 20, 2011
    4
    The only COD I haven't played since COD4 would be World at War. I started out loving them and at this point I can't even stand MW3. If you've played a good fast paced shooter and come to this it's obvious that it's just annoying to play. If you haven't then you might think it's alright...ignorance is bliss and that sort. What they've done is taken a great shooter franchise that'sThe only COD I haven't played since COD4 would be World at War. I started out loving them and at this point I can't even stand MW3. If you've played a good fast paced shooter and come to this it's obvious that it's just annoying to play. If you haven't then you might think it's alright...ignorance is bliss and that sort. What they've done is taken a great shooter franchise that's quick, accurate and FUN and added a "drawback" to just about every aspect of the game. What I mean is that, in order for them to come up with more new useless perks they had to make that particular aspect of the game slower. Reload times suck so here's sleight of hand. You can't draw your weapon fast enough so here's quickdraw pro and on and on. But the thing is you can only have 3 perks so no matter what you go with something about the gameplay is going to annoy the **** out of you. That's my biggest beef the game but many things other people are saying I agree with. It does just feel like a big ass map pack thrown together to sell millions. I can't even speak for the campaign because I never play them. Just an online multiplayer. I played this game for a week and couldn't stand it. I thought "I don't remember COD4 being this bad" so I put the game in and voila, a great FPS. This is the last COD I'm going to pay for and for that matter the last FPS until I hear about something really revolutionary.… Expand
  40. mako_psy
    Dec 22, 2011
    4
    The problem with Modern Warfare 3, is that it's essentially Modern Warfare 2.5. No one wants to wait a year, pay full retail price, only to be given a game that's near enough no different to its predecessor. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy playing the games, but the franchise has become a little too generic - and yet people will still buy into the vast amount of advertising spent on thisThe problem with Modern Warfare 3, is that it's essentially Modern Warfare 2.5. No one wants to wait a year, pay full retail price, only to be given a game that's near enough no different to its predecessor. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy playing the games, but the franchise has become a little too generic - and yet people will still buy into the vast amount of advertising spent on this game. Save your money, wait for something original.… Expand
  41. Jessthebear
    Dec 26, 2011
    4
    A game highly anticipated, however, not delivering quite what expected. In my opinion, yes the game is not very fresh, but surely if you already have an award winning game, why make it worse? Yet by keeping it similar, they have. The game is very similar to MWF2, however the feel of the game is a bit different. Firstly, the maps do make it more flowing, as promised, which does make theA game highly anticipated, however, not delivering quite what expected. In my opinion, yes the game is not very fresh, but surely if you already have an award winning game, why make it worse? Yet by keeping it similar, they have. The game is very similar to MWF2, however the feel of the game is a bit different. Firstly, the maps do make it more flowing, as promised, which does make the game a bit more exciting, but really recycled weapons and a small handful editions don't deliver enough. Furthermore, the mechanics on the game need a serious revamp. It feels like its trying to be realistic, and then it just slaps you in the face in certain parts with its un realism. One of the more popular aspects of the game jumps to mind, I am referring, of course, to quick scoping. Unfortunately it is a big chunk of the problem with the game, because it is so popular. There is nothing realistic about quick scoping, or in fact the way sniping is done in game. Most of the elements of the sniper rifle need to be looked at a lot. Also, we were promised 'more equal weapons' so people wouldn't just choose the UMP45 silenced and win. On most counts, they have made fairly equal weapons, yet some of them just jump out as being far too powerful, or far too weak. To name 1, the FMG9, akimbo with steady aim is a near unbeatable combination, and sucks a lot of the fun away from the game when faced with an opponent using them. Another aspect of the game, and one of the most horrendous is knifing. I don't know what happened between MWF2 and this, but knifing has just failed miserably. The complete inconsistency of this mechanic makes it un-usable, and it is suicide to even attempt knifing someone. There are no shining qualities of this game that make me feel amazed by it, there are some good ones, like flowing maps and new game modes (Kill confirmed) that make the game bare-able, but if you are looking to play a good multi-player first person shooter, go and buy Modern Warfare 2.… Expand
  42. GCMANINDAHOOD
    Dec 28, 2011
    4
    The game has not lived up to any of my expectations, a bland game that is almost exactly the same as the last, in fact this completely lowered the bar on the Modern warfare series, what makes this game bad is it didn't bring anything new to the table as it had promised and it falls very short of its expectations. What made Cod: Black Ops good is it was fresh and revised and brought newThe game has not lived up to any of my expectations, a bland game that is almost exactly the same as the last, in fact this completely lowered the bar on the Modern warfare series, what makes this game bad is it didn't bring anything new to the table as it had promised and it falls very short of its expectations. What made Cod: Black Ops good is it was fresh and revised and brought new things to the Call of Duty "table" per say unlike MW3.… Expand
  43. SLTYMILK
    Dec 28, 2011
    4
    Yea, sure this game is fun. But for a Modern Warfare game, it truly is as much content as maybe a slightly-larger-than-normal dlc. I mean, sure a sequel isn't a completely new game. But it still should also add something new, not be essentially the exact same game. Every once in a while, I do hop on and play, but my first time playing Modern Warfare 1 and Modern Warfare 2 feel almost theYea, sure this game is fun. But for a Modern Warfare game, it truly is as much content as maybe a slightly-larger-than-normal dlc. I mean, sure a sequel isn't a completely new game. But it still should also add something new, not be essentially the exact same game. Every once in a while, I do hop on and play, but my first time playing Modern Warfare 1 and Modern Warfare 2 feel almost the same, and it isn't exciting or fun anymore. Plus, they pump out a cod every year, making it even less exciting. Just milking the cow, because they know the little kids will buy it because they think all of their friends will buy it, and so will force their parents to buy it. A lot of the fan base is little kids who haven't played a quality game, that took effort to produce. But seriously, more people would like this game if it innovated more and was actually a new game.… Expand
  44. codfan56
    Jan 3, 2012
    4
    This game is ok but not as good as previous games such as black ops or cod 4 or even world at war.First off Infinity ward made the single player while sledgehammer games made the multiplayer.The single player is really good but the multiplayer is a disaster.The multiplayer has no balance,bad lag and they brought the ghost perk and at least two forms of second chance back which everyoneThis game is ok but not as good as previous games such as black ops or cod 4 or even world at war.First off Infinity ward made the single player while sledgehammer games made the multiplayer.The single player is really good but the multiplayer is a disaster.The multiplayer has no balance,bad lag and they brought the ghost perk and at least two forms of second chance back which everyone hated in black ops.
    Sledgehammer games does not listen to the community they brought back two hated perks ghost/second chance and actually made both of them stronger.The maps are terrible there are more campers in this cod then i have ever seen in a cod because of the maps.Bad spawn system people will spawn two feet behind you and shoot you in the back all game long.The create a class menu is too cluttered and complicated all the customization you could do in black ops is gone the playercard lacks lots of stats that black ops had and they dont even show a persons captures and defends in domination in stead you get to see assists.And to top it off MW3 has worse lag then Black Ops and that's really bad.Lol i think i will just buy treyarchs cod's from now on since sledgehomo games has no idea what they are doing.    … Expand
  45. willwynn134
    Jan 5, 2012
    4
    This game in my opinion is a complete let down sure it has a good story but and campaign but the multiplayer is not great but it all depends on what you want from this game if you like multiplayer get battlefield 3 instead all in all do not waste you money on this
  46. SenorFuzzeh
    Feb 25, 2012
    4
    I am surprised it took people this many games to realize call of duty wasn't going to change... I got tired of these games back when MW2 Came out, which was hardly 2 years ago. Theres alot better games out there. I dont understand how activasion can make so much money and then just not change anything.
  47. AududonSlayer
    Jan 16, 2012
    4
    Campaign is pretty cool but the multiplayer which is what I spend most of my time playing is to glitchy and unrealistic compared to previous CoD versions. I believe Black Ops was the best of the bunch. I will not be paying for any add ons for this games as I have for all others. Getting pretty tired of all the Glitching, 10th prestige cheats, weapon upgrade cheats, unlimited prestigeCampaign is pretty cool but the multiplayer which is what I spend most of my time playing is to glitchy and unrealistic compared to previous CoD versions. I believe Black Ops was the best of the bunch. I will not be paying for any add ons for this games as I have for all others. Getting pretty tired of all the Glitching, 10th prestige cheats, weapon upgrade cheats, unlimited prestige token cheats and I could go on and on. I am seriously considering whether I will be buying the next installment.… Expand
  48. TheKillerEon
    Jan 16, 2012
    4
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, the newest and most likely final addition to the Modern Warfare franchise arrived not too long ago, but did it live up to the hype? And is it worth your $60? If you're a hardcore fan of the franchise, maybe. But if you come expecting lots of new and exciting stuff that will make sure you get your moneys worth you'll probably be left feeling unsatisfied.Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, the newest and most likely final addition to the Modern Warfare franchise arrived not too long ago, but did it live up to the hype? And is it worth your $60? If you're a hardcore fan of the franchise, maybe. But if you come expecting lots of new and exciting stuff that will make sure you get your moneys worth you'll probably be left feeling unsatisfied. Modern Warfare 3 might have a new coat of paint on it as opposed to MW2, but at its core it is borderline identical. The spawning system is still horrendous, despite how hard Infinity Ward and the other developers of them game have apparently been working to correct them. When I still played this title spawning next to enemies (and I literally mean one maybe two feet away) was a regularity in Free-For-All. It even made its way into team based game modes that could allow you to spawn right in the path of an enemy attack only to die seconds later. There are still overpowered weapons, annoying campers that refuse to leave their corner with a claymore by it,and immature children that shouldn't be even playing the game to begin with. Plus there's more killstreaks that are rather overpowered and MORE DEATHSTREAKS. Robert Bowling, you're a lying pr*ck. You said that Last Stand was no longer in the game, but Final Stand (instead of a pistol you get your primary weapon... freaking lovely...) still remains! As well as Martrydom and the brand new and ridiculous Dead Man's Hand. Another thing to note about this game is that they're still using fake guns and and the same reload animations for almost every one. For the fake guns, I mean the ones that aren't licensed. One of which is the L86 LSW (returning from MW2). That gun does not exist, it is actually the L85A2 which ironically is officially licensed in Battlefield 3. Same goes for the "Barrett .50 Cal". There is no such thing! The real Barrett weapon in the game is the M82A1, but I guess they still can't get the licensing even after 5 or so years. LAME.

    As for other aspects of the game, the few new ones there are, they aren't half bad. Some Proficiencies for guns were useful, but some of them were borderline pointless. I don't see why they even bothered to have a Proficiency named Kick to reduce recoil when almost all of the guns people use have next to no real recoil at all. One admittedly good addition was Spec Ops Survival. Survival is based off of the tried and truly fun wave based survival game mode that has been featured in countless games over the years. While it is fun, the co-op is less that enjoyable at times. I tried playing with other friends, close to around 10 matches in total, and around half of them died half way through because of faulty connections that killed the match for no good reason. Plus, when not host, it is truly felt. When I was playing with a friend that typically has a 4 Bar connection I felt like I had a 3 or 2 bar connection making killing enemies a bit more of a source of pain than fun.

    Another key topic for this new game is the direct usage of the new CoD ELITE service. This allows users to have new levels of playing, clans, contests for real prizes, and if you're a premium member (which has a costly fee) other things such as getting all map packs for "free" and available vastly earlier than non-premium users. Although I do have a bone to pick with Elite. While I am not a PS3 player, I must say I am truly miffed about Xbox 360 users still getting the map packs before PS3 players even when a lot of PS3 players likely bought their premium membership for the express purpose to be on even ground with the 360 users. Seriously Activision, you REALLY f*cked up there. One of the last things I'll discuss is the campaign. The campaign is arguably one of the best parts of MW3, being filled with plenty of large scale set pieces and a fairly good story. But like the multiplayer, I wasn't entirely satisfied. I more so played through it just to burn some free time rather than actually wanting to play through for the enjoyment of the story.

    All in all, compared to other shooters released this year, MW3 is a very sub-par game. It lacks significant new content, it's almost identical to the last two call of Duty iterations, and it's still frustrating to no end. And to those who are competent, you may find that it can be incredibly easy to win. So easy that winning becomes boring. That's right, Call of Duty managed to make winning BORING. *slow clap* Well done, Call of Duty. You achieved something which nothing should ever do. Rating 4/10    … Expand
  49. RuneScapian
    Jan 27, 2012
    4
    This game seems far too similar to Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. It's just not a game that is really worth your sixty dollars. It is basically a $60 Map Pack for MW2.
  50. Matriix
    Feb 13, 2012
    4
    Been whoring COD since cod 4, loved every game untill now, this was a complete rehash of mw 2 but with horrible maps and horrible killstreaks. i cant play more then 20 minutes at a time. i have done every prestige on every game but with mw 3 im not even halfway through to first prestige, what this game has that the other cod games dont is a solid single player campaign. the spec ops isBeen whoring COD since cod 4, loved every game untill now, this was a complete rehash of mw 2 but with horrible maps and horrible killstreaks. i cant play more then 20 minutes at a time. i have done every prestige on every game but with mw 3 im not even halfway through to first prestige, what this game has that the other cod games dont is a solid single player campaign. the spec ops is allright, not as solid or as addictive as black ops zombie mode but then again..im a zombie freak so :)… Expand
  51. 7dogguy
    Oct 25, 2012
    4
    While the multiplayer delivers it eventually starts to feel like the same game as the others it feels as though all the guns do the same thing and the campaign is exciting but very short the deathstreaks and perks ruin the multiplayer and it loses it's replayablity spec ops is exactly the same as before and survival mode is less then impressive downgrade of zombies
  52. Iamthecell
    Feb 16, 2012
    4
    To put it simply, this is Call of Duty. There is nothing new. Nothing inovative. It uses the same engine and has the same characters and weapons from before. If you have played ANY Call of Duty in the past, you know exactly what to expect from this one. There is nothing new. It is the same crap they release every year.
  53. JeffERson8090
    Feb 24, 2012
    4
    Do yourself a favor and buy Black Ops or MW2, because its essentially the same game, just cheaper. the only reason it gets a five from me is the award winning CoD formula from CoD 4 is still here, expect absolutely nothing has been improved, and nothing has changed except for killstreaks being renamed and weapons reskinned
  54. Tripe4Life
    Mar 17, 2012
    4
    This game is quite possibly the biggest disappointment since Daikatana. The only ONLY positive thing I can EVEN say about this piece of **** is that they revamped the Spec Ops mode. That is the only thing that's keeping me from giving this a lower score than 4, and that's still being generous. And yes, the Spec Ops is much much better than MW2's. I enjoy that they scaled down theThis game is quite possibly the biggest disappointment since Daikatana. The only ONLY positive thing I can EVEN say about this piece of **** is that they revamped the Spec Ops mode. That is the only thing that's keeping me from giving this a lower score than 4, and that's still being generous. And yes, the Spec Ops is much much better than MW2's. I enjoy that they scaled down the difficulty just enough so that Veteran would still be manageable if you were very good at the game. Also, the Survival Mode is a very nice addition to spec ops, even though it feels like they copied Halo Reach's Firefight mode as well as Gears 3's Horde mode. Nonetheless, that was very well done. But other than that, the other two modes were done so poorly that it actually makes me wonder if the development team put any thought processes into these. The campaign is utter **** It's too short to be a good campaign, and the fact that they removed stealth missions (Not stealth segments, I mean balls-to-the-walls stealth missions, like All Ghillied Up, Cliffhanger, and Vendetta) is just sad. Now all there is is just straight up enemy grinding. That's not what I want to see in a campaign, I want these grind missions, because every FPS pretty much needs them, but I also want the epic stealth that Call of Duty has done so well before.

    And... I don't think I even need to touch on the multiplayer. It's pretty much just Modern Warfare 2.5 with a few new guns and even ****tier maps. I mean, sure, the killstreak setups were nice, with the assault, support, and specialist, yeah, and it was fun using some of the new guns, like the PP90-M1, despite it being very OP, but really? Recycling the same Modern Warfare 2 engine, making the maps even WORSE, and overall just completely ruining the multiplayer? Really, Infinity Ward? You went from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, one of the most influential FPS' to date, to this? For shame.    … Expand
  55. FatherDoom
    Apr 24, 2012
    4
    Sad excuse for a fps. A game for children who like arcade style crutch guns and upgrades. The longest sniper lane can't be more than two hundred meters. Yet the .50 cal is the most destructive cqb weapon in the game.
  56. RatchetClank53
    May 15, 2012
    4
    This game is a recycled piece of crap. I'm sorry, but the campaign is nothing new and the multiplayer is nothing new. I would stick to Black Ops if I were you.
  57. thecico3
    Jun 15, 2012
    4
    Story was awesome but Multiplayer FAILS... The maps are so poorly made and ridiculously small. It seems the only thing they improved on is the LOOKS of the hands and guns, everything else was so sloppily done.. i could make better maps then they could and I'm sure everyone else could too. Its really sad how my favorite series is dying.... I wish they took a second and actually put hardStory was awesome but Multiplayer FAILS... The maps are so poorly made and ridiculously small. It seems the only thing they improved on is the LOOKS of the hands and guns, everything else was so sloppily done.. i could make better maps then they could and I'm sure everyone else could too. Its really sad how my favorite series is dying.... I wish they took a second and actually put hard work into these games like they used to years ago but i guess now all they care about is money... so sad....… Expand
  58. CptBuckChazzers
    Jul 23, 2012
    4
    Ok so one thing that I am seriously disappointed is people mistaking the developers of each section of the game. So to straighten things out I'll explain. Firstly the campaign is not half bad, but short. The campaign was made by both Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer in a combined project from the big dispute after MW2 came out. Both co-wrote and developed the campaign. The multiplayer wasOk so one thing that I am seriously disappointed is people mistaking the developers of each section of the game. So to straighten things out I'll explain. Firstly the campaign is not half bad, but short. The campaign was made by both Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer in a combined project from the big dispute after MW2 came out. Both co-wrote and developed the campaign. The multiplayer was NOT created or developed by either the companies hinting why it is different from the campaign and almost completely ripped from previous games from soundclips to weapons and scrapped maps which where re-tectured from MW1. Continuing the Multiplayer was in fact made by two companies, one being the notorious Treyarch which created Black Ops and World at War hints why the awful graphics from Black Ops returns, and the second company being a new company inducted to the COD developers called Raven Software who worked on titles such as Singularity and Prototype. My evidence for the proof of this is research prior to the game coming out as well as after. Although the retail box copy does not show companies other than Sledge Hammer and Infinity Ward, if you look in the multiplayer there are emblems of both Raven and Treyarch which are their company signias. Not only in the multiplayer but at the end of the credits in MW3 it shows both Raven and Treyarch under the multiplayer development and creation section. In further ado I just want to get facts straight on the designers and different developers for who the actual blame towards the faulty mechanics and rehashing content are blamed at.… Expand
  59. ratmajat22
    Aug 7, 2012
    4
    The worst Call of Duty multiplayer yet! The support killstreak setup ruins the game, and so does juggernaut!
    Modern Warfare 2 has its problems (Intervention) but it doesn't even compare to the **** i found in this gam
  60. GamerBat
    Aug 7, 2012
    4
    Modern warfare 3 is just plain boring , yes it may be the same good old call of duty , but its biggest problem is just that . it is the same thing we played last year , the year before that and so on . single player is pointless and felt like it was made to ( SPOILER ALERT) kill off the antagonist , i felt like the missions were pretty much the same missions i'd played before in modernModern warfare 3 is just plain boring , yes it may be the same good old call of duty , but its biggest problem is just that . it is the same thing we played last year , the year before that and so on . single player is pointless and felt like it was made to ( SPOILER ALERT) kill off the antagonist , i felt like the missions were pretty much the same missions i'd played before in modern warfare 2 . graphics are the same as modern warfare 2 , and it shows its age . multiplayer is fun at first , but the pointstreaks aren't noticable , as killing is pretty much the only thing that will get most of the killstreaks , the strike packages suit well with the formula , but doesn't innovate the gameplay , and you will still find yourself running around and killing the same way you have before . spec ops survival is good , but i can't see it being the the people play the most . overall modern warfare 3 is a dissapointing game that can easily be missed out on , even by call of duty fans .… Expand
  61. ClassicGamer89
    Aug 9, 2012
    4
    The only thing that gave this game hope, would be the campaign. The story was fast paced, but slow enough to understand what is going on. The multiplayer however was not innovative, nor exciting, and was repetitive enough to only keep me playing for 2 hours then have to quit, then i might come again later, but then quit again.n It did not take a genius to come up with this game, but theThe only thing that gave this game hope, would be the campaign. The story was fast paced, but slow enough to understand what is going on. The multiplayer however was not innovative, nor exciting, and was repetitive enough to only keep me playing for 2 hours then have to quit, then i might come again later, but then quit again.n It did not take a genius to come up with this game, but the story was pretty decent.… Expand
  62. IsaacSlade
    Nov 19, 2015
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. To be honest, I really wanted to like Modern Warfare 3 as much as I loved Call of Duty 4. The multiplayer is phenomenal, yes, but...it feels exactly like Modern Warfare 2. There was nothing new to it that really matters other than weapon perks that could be added along with weapon attachments, and some of the new attachments are nice. I especially loved the hybrid sight, but unfortunately,that didn't make up for the lack of change. The weapons are cool, yes, but, again, they're near identical to the weapons of the previous game. And I don't mean in looks, I mean in the roster. The new weapons were nice, yes, and I especially loved how they brought back the G36C, as it was one of my personal favorites of Call of Duty 4. But the changes I saw just didn't change the fact that I felt like I was playing Modern Warfare 2 with a partial makeover. And I haven't even started on the short, lackluster campaign that had little to no real surprise points to it. And its attempt at shock and awe with the bomb attack that killed the little girl was, well...not shocking in the least. What would've been shocking was actually watching her get gunned down or sniped or something, rather than she's there one second, and the next, there's an explosion. You want shock and awe? Try the scene in Call of Duty 4 where a nuclear device detonates, taking out an entire Marine battalion at least, including the character you play as. Now THAT'S shock and awe. Some may disagree, of course, but that's my opinion. The fact that it could be beaten within six hours makes it even less appealing. I know I'm not the first to say this, but games that aren't dedicated to multiplayer, such as Team Fortress 2 or Blacklight: Retribution, can't stand on multiplayer content alone. The only reason I'm giving this game a 4 rather than a three or a two is the Survival mode, which I actually enjoyed. Other than that, nothing really impressed me about Modern Warfare 3, which was a huge letdown.… Expand
  63. yodagyo
    Sep 25, 2012
    4
    while the game may be fun for newcomers its a huge let down to fans of the original 2. Sacrificing unique and larger maps for the small repetitive, and often annoying style. im giving this game a 4 because i feel like its not moving forward and not doing what a fps franchise should be doing, especially with this being there 3rd game.... come on.
  64. Gomez
    Oct 2, 2012
    4
    As a fan of the Call of Duty multiplayer. The Modern Warfare 3 multiplayer was not as a good as the previous Call of Duty
  65. EDJET787
    Oct 10, 2012
    4
    This has got to be one of the most overrated games by critics ever. I used to be a COD fanboy so please listen to what I have to say. Lets start with some positives, the campaign as always is cinematic and decent and once again short. Specs Ops has new missions along with survival mode with waves of enemies. That's pretty much all the good I have to say about MW3, now with the negatives.This has got to be one of the most overrated games by critics ever. I used to be a COD fanboy so please listen to what I have to say. Lets start with some positives, the campaign as always is cinematic and decent and once again short. Specs Ops has new missions along with survival mode with waves of enemies. That's pretty much all the good I have to say about MW3, now with the negatives. While the multiplayer is fun sometimes, you can tell just by looking at gameplay that the designers were incredibly lazy and thinking were all just a bunch of idiots. Nothing at all is entirely new or original, there were just a few tweaks hear and there. Sound quality is horrible, and graphics again are the same. This is the only Call of Duty game I ever returned to the store after a few months of play. Save your money and never include this in your library.… Expand
  66. Goodtaste13
    Oct 15, 2012
    4
    Mw3 is the exact same as black ops. The only thing different is the story. CoD creators are really running out of ideas. Its the same stuff every year.everything is predictable.things calm down then a explosion...things calm down....then a explosion.i wouldnt recommend this game to anybody only for good graphic lovers
  67. Jryan
    Mar 30, 2013
    4
    The one thing that bothered me about this game was the blatant lack of creativity and innovation. While the general structure of the game held its own, and the the story fit the plot line of the previous two games, with a new playable character and the usual blockbuster set pieces, I felt as though the weapons were either reused or designed differently, (with little variation in regard toThe one thing that bothered me about this game was the blatant lack of creativity and innovation. While the general structure of the game held its own, and the the story fit the plot line of the previous two games, with a new playable character and the usual blockbuster set pieces, I felt as though the weapons were either reused or designed differently, (with little variation in regard to new weapons,) the graphics were actually sub-par to that of modern warfare 2, if you can even believe that, and every time I started a new mission it felt just like playing a call of duty 4/ modern warfare 2 mission, with only a new shell around it to disguise the feeling of redundancy. I felt as though the title of this game would've been better named "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.5." This low quality and low entertainment of this game, (in my personal opinion) was heavily influenced by the firings of Vince Zampella and Jason West, who were the heads of the developer company infinity ward before being fired for supposed "insubordination." As West and Zampella left, 38 infinity ward members left as well, leaving an insufficient amount of untalented developers and programmers at the head of MW3. As a longtime COD fan, (specifically the modern warfare series,) I found it thoroughly disappointing that this game did not meet the usual gusto and new found excitement that the other two games upheld, which is why I rated this game 4/10.… Expand
  68. WyattTheAwesome
    May 29, 2013
    4
    Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 was very disappointing to me. The campaign was only in the range of 4 hours long and not nearly as many Spec Op missions (unless you pay extra as DLC) and the multiplayer is also another grenadefest. Out of the Modern Warfare trilogy, this is by far the worst and wouldn't recommend getting. However, to give credit where credit is due, the campaign, despiteCall of Duty Modern Warfare 3 was very disappointing to me. The campaign was only in the range of 4 hours long and not nearly as many Spec Op missions (unless you pay extra as DLC) and the multiplayer is also another grenadefest. Out of the Modern Warfare trilogy, this is by far the worst and wouldn't recommend getting. However, to give credit where credit is due, the campaign, despite being short, was entertaining and the spec op missions were fun, but MW3 just feels like a step backwards from it's previous game.… Expand
  69. GameInterpreter
    Jun 18, 2013
    4
    The game offers nearly nothing new to the series apart from a campaign with different missions with the same run here and shoot him tactics. Multiplayer is... Well play MW2 or MW and you know absolutely everything you need to know. Only thing that kept me playing were some interesting action scenes that occurred.

    4 out of 10
  70. MysteriousRage
    Jul 22, 2013
    4
    I generally don't like too join the enormous and immature people that hate Call of Duty. But MW3 is seemingly the worst Call of Duty too date. Why? You have an overblown, short, scripted event filled, linear, mind numbing-Micheal bay action style campaign. The plot makes absolutely so sense at all. Then you have MP, which was promised to return to the CoD4 style of games. They said theyI generally don't like too join the enormous and immature people that hate Call of Duty. But MW3 is seemingly the worst Call of Duty too date. Why? You have an overblown, short, scripted event filled, linear, mind numbing-Micheal bay action style campaign. The plot makes absolutely so sense at all. Then you have MP, which was promised to return to the CoD4 style of games. They said they were taking out the many nuisances from MW2 and CoD 4 for a polished game. In reality, you get a Modern Warfare 2 expansion pack, expect with more restrictions (invisible walls galore). That isn't an exaggeration. This game is pretty much the same exact game. But this time around, it's boring. Bad maps, bad guns, bad perks and the new killstreak system just doesn't work.

    They also have a new Survival mode. Meant to compete with Treyarch's Zombies. It's fun for awhile but get's old really fast.

    On the surface, it is a polished game, but there just isn't any thing noteworthy or exciting. It just feels routine at this point.    … Expand
  71. proxskullz
    Sep 9, 2013
    4
    The reason people hate call of duty so much is because of this game. They basically took modern warfare 2 made the graphics worse and added a boring survival mode that fails to compete with trey-arch's zombie mode. This game is awful.
  72. cag11
    Nov 24, 2013
    4
    I played this with my friend, who is a CoD fan, and I got to say I was very unimpressed. It seems to be recycling the same garbage over and over again, to the point where people are just so confused onto the way that games are made.
  73. joao1198pedro
    Nov 28, 2013
    4
    seriously what is the problem in innovate a little in the why they always do this with us,i hated this game,it is almosta copy of modern warfare 2,most disapointing game of the year.
  74. WayT101
    Jan 4, 2014
    4
    Modern warfare 2 Over priced DLC. Good as a stand alone COD game but will only please fans of Modern warfare 2 if you really want a slightly polished of version of it or if you get it cheap and you know what you are buying, otherwise this game was a complete rip off at release.
  75. popPunker
    Mar 5, 2022
    4
    Esse jogo é o motivo de muitas pessoas pensarem que até hoje call of duty é sempre a mesma coisa, ele é MUITO parecido com o modern warfare 2, isso não é tão ruim pq mw2 foi um ótimo cod, mas obviamente que é muito menos do que o esperado.
    Ele mais parece uma DLC standalone do que de fato um outro jogo, tem novidades interessantes e essas novidades impactam muito na gameplay, mas é    Esse jogo é o motivo de muitas pessoas pensarem que até hoje call of duty é sempre a mesma coisa, ele é MUITO parecido com o modern warfare 2, isso não é tão ruim pq mw2 foi um ótimo cod, mas obviamente que é muito menos do que o esperado.
    Ele mais parece uma DLC standalone do que de fato um outro jogo, tem novidades interessantes e essas novidades impactam muito na gameplay, mas é compreensível o hate que esse jogo levou na época apesar do jogo em si ser muito divertido.

    Quem gostou da historia do MW2, não vai se decepcionar com esse, na minha opinião ele tem a melhor campanha da franquia, o multiplayer não supera o do seu sucessor (BO2) mas também é muito bom embora atualmente tenha poucos jogadores.

    Até então, pra mim ele seria um jogo nota 7 MAS na versão do xbox 360 (vi alguns relatos de também acontecer na versão do ps3, mas não posso confirmar) esse jogo tem um problema nos servidores, tu só consegue jogar o multiplayer dele se tu já tiver jogado anteriormente naquela conta, caso contrário tu vai ficar eternamente buscando partida e nunca vai encontrar.
    Então se tu pensa comprar esse jogo no xbox 360 em 2022, saiba que pra você vai ser como se os servidores estivessem fechados.    … Expand
  76. stescotty
    Jan 2, 2012
    3
    Having played all incarnations of COD, this one really doesn't change much, nor bring anything new to the table. Rather than a few minor tweaks to the multiplayer when it comes to killstreaks, and weapons the game is not an upgrade or a downgrade, it's just the same. If you are looking for a very quick and pointless game of shoot'em up, where you die almost as much as you kill, this gameHaving played all incarnations of COD, this one really doesn't change much, nor bring anything new to the table. Rather than a few minor tweaks to the multiplayer when it comes to killstreaks, and weapons the game is not an upgrade or a downgrade, it's just the same. If you are looking for a very quick and pointless game of shoot'em up, where you die almost as much as you kill, this game is for you. If you want to play a game that it's maps are qso compact that it promotes camping, this game is for you. The gameplay is tired, and the sound is sub par...but it is fun for about 2 to 3 hours, then it gets boring and repetitive, fast!!! I can't give it a zero, because it does have some fun gameplay, but that gameplay is short lived.… Expand
  77. Jinzor
    Nov 11, 2011
    3
    The review I was going to write was going to be longer than 5000 characters, so I am just going to list the positives and negatives of this game.

    Positives:
    â
  78. Ireland914
    Jan 4, 2012
    3
    Isn't it a little odd that this game has great reviews from critics and yet the community is tearing it a new one? It's the same crap they cranked out with MW2. An uninspired sequel with very little new content. They'll keep throwing together garbage sequels as long as you people keep buying them.

    They may be paying off the big name critics but the gaming community can see the truth    Isn't it a little odd that this game has great reviews from critics and yet the community is tearing it a new one? It's the same crap they cranked out with MW2. An uninspired sequel with very little new content. They'll keep throwing together garbage sequels as long as you people keep buying them.

    They may be paying off the big name critics but the gaming community can see the truth about this series. It's a cash cow with very little to offer in quality gaming. Spend some time making a NEW game instead of focusing on cranking out a rehashes sequel each year.    … Expand
  79. forgie
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    I'm about 30% into the campaign and I don't really want to keep playing it. The story is a mess and the regular progression of coming up to more spawning enemies is old and boring. The same old graphics leave nothing to be excited about. I've played 5 hours of multiplayer and so far I haven't been impressed with the maps. Many of them seem like rush jobs that just feel like mazes whereI'm about 30% into the campaign and I don't really want to keep playing it. The story is a mess and the regular progression of coming up to more spawning enemies is old and boring. The same old graphics leave nothing to be excited about. I've played 5 hours of multiplayer and so far I haven't been impressed with the maps. Many of them seem like rush jobs that just feel like mazes where you can flank any location multiple ways. The one positive I've noticed is the gun sounds and feel which have been improved. The kill confirm death match mode is also something new and enjoyable. I'll play this for a while with friends, but unless there are dramatic changes in next years release I'm going to have to pass on buying it for the first time in a long time. It's time for the franchise to give us something new and stop milking the hype they created from the first Modern Warfare.… Expand
  80. Alvagore
    Nov 14, 2011
    3
    Do not buy this game, is more of the same, stick on MW2 or Black Ops.
    the only thing of this game that worth is the single player, for that i give it a 3.
  81. rhetoricmonkey
    Nov 30, 2011
    3
    Fun on a scale of 1 to 10 is a 3 for multiplayer.
    Frustration on a scale of 1 to 10 is a 7 for multiplayer.
    Some weapons have been gimped instead of removed. Single player is the best part of this game, unfortunately I bought it primarily for the multiplayer. Floating network. Aka no dedicated servers so your experience depends heavily on your connection to the host player who has the    Fun on a scale of 1 to 10 is a 3 for multiplayer.
    Frustration on a scale of 1 to 10 is a 7 for multiplayer.
    Some weapons have been gimped instead of removed.
    Single player is the best part of this game, unfortunately I bought it primarily for the multiplayer.
    Floating network. Aka no dedicated servers so your experience depends heavily on your connection to the host player who has the best advantage.
    Hit detection, delayed kills.
    OMG spawns!
    Graphics look old but crisp; cleaned up MW2.
    A last note about this game is that it provides more frustration than my wallet can tolerate. I'll have to be hard pressed to buy the next title in this series.    … Expand
  82. Libby
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    The campaign is fantastic definitely a 9/10, Spec Ops as well I would give an 8/10 but the aspect of this game that really lets it down is the multiplayer. The main problem is the maps are way to small. This just encourages people to hide round corners and wait, spawn camping is rife as well. I was thoroughly disappointed by this. I believe it is better than battlefield 3 but only becauseThe campaign is fantastic definitely a 9/10, Spec Ops as well I would give an 8/10 but the aspect of this game that really lets it down is the multiplayer. The main problem is the maps are way to small. This just encourages people to hide round corners and wait, spawn camping is rife as well. I was thoroughly disappointed by this. I believe it is better than battlefield 3 but only because the BF servers are pretty poor right now.… Expand
  83. danhalen74
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    ok. ok. i loved COD4, WOW was ok, MW2 was fun to start with but the MP was broken, BLOPS personally for me was excellent MP especially, MW3 so far.......its not that its awful but its so uninspiring. Im literally just churning through the SP so i can trade it in. The MP is woeful, utterly utterly awful. Terrible hit detection, retarded spawn points where you get constantly killed fromok. ok. i loved COD4, WOW was ok, MW2 was fun to start with but the MP was broken, BLOPS personally for me was excellent MP especially, MW3 so far.......its not that its awful but its so uninspiring. Im literally just churning through the SP so i can trade it in. The MP is woeful, utterly utterly awful. Terrible hit detection, retarded spawn points where you get constantly killed from behind the second you hit X, Serious lag - the amount of times ive got the drop on someone, fired first almost point blank.....and nothing ....just a volley of bullets back. seriously, you check the kill cams and your avatar hasnt even fired a bullet in the replay. Survival would be good if you could have more than 2 players. MP maps are all forgettable, no classics like terminal or summit. just grey and brown blocks everywhere. i havent ever played battlefield but surely it must be better than this?… Expand
  84. Ravager
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    I've played through the singleplayer and enough hours of the multiplayer to get a good idea of what the game is like.

    The singleplayer is terrible, like all of the recent games, but with an even sillier plot. This is forgivable however - who plays this game for the singleplayer? The multiplayer... well... its the exact same thing as the previous two. And to be honest, I'm sick of it.    I've played through the singleplayer and enough hours of the multiplayer to get a good idea of what the game is like.

    The singleplayer is terrible, like all of the recent games, but with an even sillier plot. This is forgivable however - who plays this game for the singleplayer?

    The multiplayer... well... its the exact same thing as the previous two. And to be honest, I'm sick of it. Sure the previous games were good, but you can only play so much of it before getting bored. Infinity Ward could have at least TRIED to change things up but they didn't. And I feel ripped off for paying full price for it, something like this should be an expansion or DLC or something. It doesn't justify purchasing a new game.    … Expand
  85. dsa88
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    I'll make this simple. What is MW3?

    Take MW2, make guns kill twice as fast, and make all maps small. That is MW3.

    The maps are the biggest issue. They are small, cramped, cluster**** maps. There is no strategy other than hoping that you see the other guy first.
  86. crun
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    The game is plain bad. It's sad that with each game since CoD4, this franchise keeps going backwards. Lack of dedicated ranked server is awful. The biggest change when compared to MW2 is weapon leveling, lol. They just copy-pasted 90% stuff to their "new" game
  87. PlasmaPrestige
    Nov 5, 2012
    3
    If Modern Warfare 3 had been the first game in a franchise, then it would be an average to good. However, Activision's repetition with the same formula has not only grown old, but is now beginning to seriously hurt the franchise. Activision, with MW3, has made it clear that it is not interested in making games of high quality with rich content for deserving players, but rather milk as muchIf Modern Warfare 3 had been the first game in a franchise, then it would be an average to good. However, Activision's repetition with the same formula has not only grown old, but is now beginning to seriously hurt the franchise. Activision, with MW3, has made it clear that it is not interested in making games of high quality with rich content for deserving players, but rather milk as much money from a giant franchise without contributing anything useful to it. Shame on you, Activision.… Expand
  88. Necrotaur
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    If you've played any previous Call of Duty, you've played MW3. There are so many rehashed missions that you can no longer believe they're self-aware parodies. I'm going to hazard a guess and say that over half the campaign is some form of on-rails shooter, following behind a guy and doing exactly what he does (Soap Says... go to the prone!), or a slow-mo shootout after breaching a door.If you've played any previous Call of Duty, you've played MW3. There are so many rehashed missions that you can no longer believe they're self-aware parodies. I'm going to hazard a guess and say that over half the campaign is some form of on-rails shooter, following behind a guy and doing exactly what he does (Soap Says... go to the prone!), or a slow-mo shootout after breaching a door. The online portion is about what you'd expect, fairly decent with a few added features, but nothing particularly groundbreaking. Overall it feels like a reskin of Black Ops.… Expand
  89. Curnee
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    I used to love the Call of Duty franchise, it gave you freedom, and had one of the most responsive series of gameplay mechanics out there. Now it is just a re-skined repeat of the same broken multiplayer. Nothing more than clunky, blinding fire to the back drop of never ending invisible walls.
  90. PurplePlains
    Nov 20, 2011
    3
    Put simply the online multiplayer mode is no fun any more. Call of Duty has become such a large and continuous franchise that the user base has expanded massively, leading to the once glorious days of killing noobs online and getting killstreaks, to the now defunct and clearly broken, unfair mechanics which lead to everyone running around and getting killed, forget killstreaks because youPut simply the online multiplayer mode is no fun any more. Call of Duty has become such a large and continuous franchise that the user base has expanded massively, leading to the once glorious days of killing noobs online and getting killstreaks, to the now defunct and clearly broken, unfair mechanics which lead to everyone running around and getting killed, forget killstreaks because you won't get any, it is literally impossible to turn a corner without a camper, hacker or no-scoper putting a bullet in your head. A once great online experience tarnished due to a rushed development team making casual drivel, I will not be purchasing any other games in the series from now on.… Expand
  91. Xsplicit
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    The first thing that struck me playing this game was just how shamelessly similar everything was to Call of Duty 4.. and 5.. and 6.. and 7 for that matter as well. This goes beyond simply re-using the same 13 year old quake 3 engine; the art direction, textures, weapons and environments all seem to have been re-used. The only innovation amounting to a slight reskin in a different colour.The first thing that struck me playing this game was just how shamelessly similar everything was to Call of Duty 4.. and 5.. and 6.. and 7 for that matter as well. This goes beyond simply re-using the same 13 year old quake 3 engine; the art direction, textures, weapons and environments all seem to have been re-used. The only innovation amounting to a slight reskin in a different colour. While this might allow Activision to churn out a game every year, it's gotten to the point where the franchise feels stale and tasteless. There were times I wondered if the level designers competed with each other over how many explosions and collapsing buildings they could cram into each level, and it's clear to see the drop in quality after Activision prudently fired the majority of Infinity Ward's developers. Setting aside the linear on-rails progression, the casual hand-holding and the 4 hour completion time - I can deal with those annoyances, as long as the game is fun and engrossing. Unfortunately Call of Duty 9..or whatever number they're on now isn't. Throw in the weak, unrealistic gun sounds, the whack-a-mole rudimentary AI, unremarkable missions and the generic 'America saves the world all over again' storyline and you're dealing with quite a turd. How reviewers are giving this game a perfect 10/10 is honestly beyond me, and why this game (and this game alone) retails at 10% above the price of every other game confounds me even further. I would honestly rather play through the original Call of Duty again. At least that game provided an emotional attachment, as it wasn't based on pure fabrication.… Expand
  92. MindSpaz
    Dec 29, 2011
    3
    This game is nearly EXACTLY like MW2, in every aspect. The online game play has only been slightly tweaked since the previous game and the overall game feels rushed and un-finished. The single player game play is once again, exactly like MW2, it feels rushed and boring. It's a lot of the same and there is not much to say. MW3 feels like a cash in to make some extra cash, because they knowThis game is nearly EXACTLY like MW2, in every aspect. The online game play has only been slightly tweaked since the previous game and the overall game feels rushed and un-finished. The single player game play is once again, exactly like MW2, it feels rushed and boring. It's a lot of the same and there is not much to say. MW3 feels like a cash in to make some extra cash, because they know that their players are going to buy their game. I cannot finish the single player because the levels are not fun, and they feel like a task that I NEED to complete just for the achievements. Same exact thing with spec ops mode, I feel like I need to beat all the levels just for that achievement score. Nothing more. Also, I am aware most of the people working on the game got laid off, and I feel sorry for those people, but, to put it simply, there are crews of 10 or less people who make much better games, in a shorter amount of time. It can't be that hard to put a new skin on MW2, because that's what this game is.… Expand
  93. zyryx
    Feb 8, 2012
    3
    Same old stuff, nothing really new. Single player was enjoyable, but short, sometime a little over the top. But again, nothing new. The special ops missions? who cares, very boring. Multiplayer, they really dropped the ball after Call of Duty Black Ops. In Black Op they had a multiplayer option called "combat training" where you and your friends could play private matches with AISame old stuff, nothing really new. Single player was enjoyable, but short, sometime a little over the top. But again, nothing new. The special ops missions? who cares, very boring. Multiplayer, they really dropped the ball after Call of Duty Black Ops. In Black Op they had a multiplayer option called "combat training" where you and your friends could play private matches with AI controlled bots. And while you can play private matches on MW3 and avoid all the douchbaggery on XBL, there are no AI controlled bots. And for that reason more than any other I'm panning this game.… Expand
  94. heathyaaj
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    I don't think that it's just hating something because it's popular, although there are a minority that do. I also don't think the hatred is because of the game either. I think the hatred comes from the fact that 'fanboys' buy the game year in year out without there being much of a change and dismiss the faults that are brought to light by the more casual player of COD which in turn, hasI don't think that it's just hating something because it's popular, although there are a minority that do. I also don't think the hatred is because of the game either. I think the hatred comes from the fact that 'fanboys' buy the game year in year out without there being much of a change and dismiss the faults that are brought to light by the more casual player of COD which in turn, has created an aura of self confidence/borderline arrogance by activision to not try harder and milk the series for all it's worth.

    Honestly when people bring up things like FIFA and games of a like, mainly yearly updates as a reason as to why COD should be defended to the bitter end, it just irritates me that little bit more.

    If you measure a game year on year then the amount of changes in the likes of FIFA, GOW, Assassins Creed and Uncharted etc, then you would struggle a little bit in naming them. But if you say, look at the changes in the games over the last 5 years (since MW) then you will see the differences in these games over COD are more prominent.

    FIFA 2007 - 2012 - Brand new game engine, impact engine, vast amounts of different shooting mechanics/ Animations, Running, new dribbling system and passing selections and Animations, penalty taking system, Set piece creation, player creation, New leagues/more international teams and you can customise the difficulty in the user settings and CPU settings like passing error, shooting error and goalkeeping ability. The list can go on

    Look at Uncharted from 1-3. Each one has a fantastic narrative, challenges, puzzles and characters that you can see in real depth and enjoy. They have online Multiplayer which has improved from UC2 to UC3 and the graphical changes from 1-3 are excellent. List can go on

    Assassins creed from 1 through to Brotherhood- Again each story is well thought out although at times a little confusing. Different challenges and side missions/collectables along the way. The also now have multiplayer, which for the best part is getting better and better. New animations and weapons for taking down enemies, different clothing and much improved graphics. List can go on

    You compare these to the likes of COD from COD4(MW) to MW3 and really over the past 5 years there isn't much to shout about in terms of changes made. The SP and the story are forgettable in each game, no real characters, Graphics haven't improved that much, neither has the sound quality or player/CPU animations (getting from standing down to prone is abit of a chore). The explosions are pathetic, as are the breaching of buildings (once you've seen one you've seen them all) and the knifing is still the same, just a swipe and then your done. It would be nice to see them actually grappling with the opposition before using the knife, because a swipe across the back won't really do it.

    Online, I haven't really played that much but from what someone told me THERE ARE A FEW BUILDINGS ETC THAT HAVE BEEN RECYCLED AND USED BEFORE IN EARLIER INSTALLMENTS. The only thing they've really done to balance the game out is using the killstreaks and perks and no real gameplay changes and even that isn't great. You can still use your overpowered Sniper rifle to "no scope" or "quickscope". Then there is the small and overpriced maps that have little to no real detail in and look more like cardboard cut outs.

    Is it because Activision are too insistent on keeping the game at 60fps (they seem to be using this as there main selling point) that they are unwilling to add anything new? or are they just milking it because a lot of people out there will buy it regardless because of the series' reputation from earlier installments?

    Either way i'm just glad i've rented, rather than fork out £35-40 for a game that has changed littler over the past 5 years. Its a lazy representation of a franchise that should be going from strength to strength instead, it's stuttering along and milking everything they can out of people. Disgrace.    … Expand
  95. silentshade
    Mar 23, 2012
    3
    It boils down to the fact that this is just MW2 with extra Sh*t, The game has done nothing to improve it's self and has only added extra stuff which can be exploited to further ruin the multiplayer experience. The void of dedicated severs is another reason this game is terrible, I mean if battlefield has had them for years now and Activision make billions from CoD I am pretty sure they canIt boils down to the fact that this is just MW2 with extra Sh*t, The game has done nothing to improve it's self and has only added extra stuff which can be exploited to further ruin the multiplayer experience. The void of dedicated severs is another reason this game is terrible, I mean if battlefield has had them for years now and Activision make billions from CoD I am pretty sure they can afford to get dedicated servers. See the reason they don't add anything good or improve anything bad is because of YOU. Yeah you the person who buys the game because all of you give them your money they have no need to make the game better because they will still get your money so the cheaper it is to make it, the more profit they make. An easy way to know this is the fact they spent less on MW3 then on MW2, if you can honestly accept the same iteration of game every year and consider it good then to be honest the gaming industry is simply going to die with the loss of creativity and good games.… Expand
  96. Burnout-151
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    I played Call of Duty since when it was in a WW2 setting, back in '03, and was an avid fan of CoD since. My distaste for the franchise started lurking in around when World at War came out. So I am no fanboy of just BF3, only a fanboy of First Person Shooters. Now onto my review.

    If you played Modern Warfare 2, then you played Modern Warfare 3, with maybe an innovation. That innovation    I played Call of Duty since when it was in a WW2 setting, back in '03, and was an avid fan of CoD since. My distaste for the franchise started lurking in around when World at War came out. So I am no fanboy of just BF3, only a fanboy of First Person Shooters. Now onto my review.

    If you played Modern Warfare 2, then you played Modern Warfare 3, with maybe an innovation. That innovation is instead of Killstreaks, you get a "pointstreak" where it will allow you to choose your "limited" reward, based on what "strike package" you choose. So, they changed the name from Killstreak to PointStreak, and that is their innovation. Sounds familiar....

    The graphics are subpar, compared to todays standard,(five year old graphics engine powering it.) and the gameplay is the same as any iteration of the past 3 Call of Duty's. I cannot give it a 0, due to the fact that it was a fun game 2...3...4 years ago, but now, I cannot see the point of enjoying this game anymore knowing that it is a remake of a game years older, with no true advancements in the game. Also, paying for the Call of Suty Elite service is a load of crap. World at War did the same service for free. World at War had stat tracking, Your aiming against enemies, where you died at on a map etc etc... So pay 60$ for a game, then 50$ now for the elite service,(If bought it past the 13th, then it turns to 80$) upfront, So now that turns into 110$ to play Modern Warfare 2 Map Pack MW3 Edition... Seriously? Yes you get DLC for the next year, but the fee upfront just kills me.    … Expand
  97. alpha1126
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    Went this morning and got it, been playing it, beat the campaign and multiplayer, and now I am returning it. I actually managed to sell it to a 13 year old's mom standing outside the local gamestop for $65 dollars because they ran out of copies. Suggest waiting a few weeks for all the lag and glitches to come out. Not worth 60 dollars.
  98. Artomoz
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    Multiplayer: It feels a bit broken, then again it was Sledge Hammer that made the multiplayer aspect of the game. The servers are laggy. The hit detection is still the same old Modern Warfare you'd expect. Knifing the air gets a kill. Shooting bullets onto an invincible hit box gets a kill, whilst the player is way out of harms way. Hit detection is way off in general. Bullets still do notMultiplayer: It feels a bit broken, then again it was Sledge Hammer that made the multiplayer aspect of the game. The servers are laggy. The hit detection is still the same old Modern Warfare you'd expect. Knifing the air gets a kill. Shooting bullets onto an invincible hit box gets a kill, whilst the player is way out of harms way. Hit detection is way off in general. Bullets still do not penetrate thin walls or wooden crates but can penetrate 12 inch thick titanium steel. Character control in general feels a clumsy. Weapons are awkward to work with. Maps are the typical MW maps you'd expect if not worse. Unimaginative, bland, and with bad spawn points. Kills do not feel as rewarding as before and kill streaks are not as amusing. It's a great fast paced game but in general most of it feels like a rehash of MW2 with a blend of terrible Black Ops maps. Single Player: Same old cliche story suitable for people/children who need explosions and chaos to obtain an orgasm and deem it a good game or movie. I was in pain trying to finish this game, instead of enjoying it. I just wanted to get this garbage story to end and to my surprise; the expected MW ending. The AI of this game like always, using the same bad programing can cause some what of a humor. Small scaled linear pathway maps like usual. In conclusions, this game is nothing but a rehash of the old game (including Treyarch's Black Ops) with the number 3 stamped in front. Save your self $60 and keep on enjoying MW2.… Expand
  99. Paradoxed
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    Why bother making a new great game when you can just take your last one and "polish" it a litte? This is IW's mindset behind MW3. Never have I seen such a lazy excuse for a "new" iteration in a game series.

    The campaign is mindless and cliche as expected, but MW3 goes out of its way to show you how uterly unoriginal it is. The visuals are practically identical to MW2, and so is most    Why bother making a new great game when you can just take your last one and "polish" it a litte? This is IW's mindset behind MW3. Never have I seen such a lazy excuse for a "new" iteration in a game series.

    The campaign is mindless and cliche as expected, but MW3 goes out of its way to show you how uterly unoriginal it is. The visuals are practically identical to MW2, and so is most everything else. EVERY single add on to the multiplayer is directly taken from other games. Kill confirmed knocked off from Crysis 2. Halo's Oddball is taken and given a different name here. Gears of War's Horde mode is copied, but with less than impressive AI, is just another tack on. This is laziness at its grandest. If you really liked MW2, then play MW2. This is a 60 dollar polish of it.    … Expand
  100. Posthumous
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    I love the genre, and I've spent alot of hours playing the COD franchise over the years and sadly I just can't do it again. The game is solid, the multiplayer is there like always but it's just that. I wanted to be blown away, I wanted to have those solid moments and I do when i'm running with the old COD team and yet.. something's missing. It's just more of the same, same concepts,I love the genre, and I've spent alot of hours playing the COD franchise over the years and sadly I just can't do it again. The game is solid, the multiplayer is there like always but it's just that. I wanted to be blown away, I wanted to have those solid moments and I do when i'm running with the old COD team and yet.. something's missing. It's just more of the same, same concepts, same things right and wrong, same things lacking from the last two editions to this one. Perhaps other FPS in the genre have tainted my opinions by providing something different, more fluid and honestly harder. Doesn't mean I'll give up, but if the next one is this one again without some significant game play changes.. I won't be back.… Expand
Page:

Awards & Rankings

13
#13 Best Xbox 360 Game of 2011
1
#1 Most Discussed Xbox 360 Game of 2011
13
#13 Most Shared Xbox 360 Game of 2011

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
88

Generally favorable reviews - based on 81 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 79 out of 81
  2. Mixed: 2 out of 81
  3. Negative: 0 out of 81
  1. Gamer Limit
    Jan 11, 2012
    85
    Ultimately, Modern Warfare 3 feels similar to it's brethren, but that doesn't mean it isn't a great game. The single player element is still exciting, and multiplayer has more options than ever – if you're a fan of Call of Duty, Modern Warfare 3 is a no brainer.
    Read full review
  2. Game Over Online
    Dec 28, 2011
    84
    Modern Warfare 3, while still an excellent thrill ride in its own right, feels far too similar to MW2 or even Black Ops for my taste.
    Read full review
  3. Xbox World 360 Magazine UK
    Dec 12, 2011
    88
    I never expected Modern Warfare 3 to go toe-to-toe with EA's juggernaut this year, but it came out of the gates with a tour de force campaign and co-op mode. It loses points with a perhaps too-familiar multiplayer that caters to the juvenile on Xbox Live; though don't be mistaken, Modern Warfare 3 is one hell of a shooter and a highlight for a series that just won't die – no matter how much we wish it bloody would, at times.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »