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. IngloriousHenry
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Call of Duty failed this year, not because it is a bad game, but because it doesn't deliver any inovation. The Call of Duty series needs to follow the Battlefield example and stay out of the market for some years, and renovate the franchise... That said, I have no choice but to give a low "grade"... Call of Duty just failed the year.
  2. crispi182
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    MW3 viene siendo la misma tonteria y no pienso comprarlo si siguen llengo asi BF3 les dara en la madre por noobs, mil veces me quedo con mi battlefield que con este juego de porqueria
  3. Redna1L
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Not only is this EXACTLY the same as the previous games but it has even less variety. Where just about every mission seems to be mowing down hordes of enemies. Even the Spec Ops is like this.

    Yes it's polished but there is zero innovation here. Very stale.
  4. supersonic196
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    The Call of duty series as a whole has been disgustingly bad since modern warfare one, but this game takes the cake. This isn't a game, this is a movie with 2 minutes of gameplay between every scripted sequence. Honestly, the world would be a better place if the entire FPS genre was dead. There hasn't been a single FPS since Halo one that had any legitimate innovation. Call of Duty modernThe Call of duty series as a whole has been disgustingly bad since modern warfare one, but this game takes the cake. This isn't a game, this is a movie with 2 minutes of gameplay between every scripted sequence. Honestly, the world would be a better place if the entire FPS genre was dead. There hasn't been a single FPS since Halo one that had any legitimate innovation. Call of Duty modern warfare 3 is a prime example of corporate greed overtaking the gaming industry. The fact that this was even released boggles the mind. This game is a clone of every other modern call of duty, with some new textures, different maps, and a different yet equally terrible campaign. The online mode is exactly the same, why would anybody even buy this if they can get the exact same experience in that pile of unimaginative bland shooters that they already own?

    Call of Duty tries it best to be something it's not, a good game, but unfortunately falls short in almost every way imaginable. Skip this one at all costs. And before you think about Battle Field 3, that's the EXACT same thing with even more automation.    … Expand
  5. joshpt
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Commenting on Ninja and others below... No game deserves a 10 out of 10 or 0 out of 0. The reason having the "same" thing is bad is because you is a waste of money. It is the same thing with madden for me.
  6. MovesLikeJagoff
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Same look and gameplay. Same terrible MUDDY graphics. But.. Different Maps and kinda different single player makes this game worth $15 not freakin $60 coz if yo pay for this $hit: You kiddin me bruh?!? Go buy skyrim, uncharted 3 or bf3 instead you won't be disappointed on buying those games.
  7. AFTERHOURS90
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Where do I begin? Let's start with the fact that I've purchase and played every Call of Duty game since CoD 1 & 2 on PC. Next, let's establish my personal top three games in the series: 1. Call of Duty 2 PC (pre-perks, no kill streaks, undeniably balanced gameplay where skill was king), 2. Call of Duty 4 360/PC (the introduction of perks and kill streaks left players with new features, butWhere do I begin? Let's start with the fact that I've purchase and played every Call of Duty game since CoD 1 & 2 on PC. Next, let's establish my personal top three games in the series: 1. Call of Duty 2 PC (pre-perks, no kill streaks, undeniably balanced gameplay where skill was king), 2. Call of Duty 4 360/PC (the introduction of perks and kill streaks left players with new features, but gameplay was still balanced and solid overall - still a popular game on PC), 3. Call of Duty Black Ops (a surprisingly fun relief from the previous two garbage releases, almost restored my faith in the series). Now, we have Modern Warfare 3. Handles like WaW (aforementioned garbage release from Treyarch) and looks like it, too. So what's new? Infinity Ward threw in the latest armament technology, put together some new maps, a new, hideous menu system, and to top it off, employed the perks, death streaks, and kill streaks from MW2. I thought to myself, "So far, nothing out of the ordinary for the series." I'm not surprised at the lack of change from MW2. I am, however, surprised at the lack of effort from IW. Take a hint from BF3 and update your graphics. Take another hint from BF3 and make sure your game incorporates quality sound. I'm stunned at how bad the game looks and sounds. The guns sound identical, which wouldn't be a problem if they didn't sound like the audio department recorded a B-17 dropping 2-tons on a microphone. I believe a friend mentioned something along the lines of "a tank with diarrhea" when referring to the sound of the UMP. Let's move on the the handling of the game. One of the series' most important characteristics is the gameplay. Players expect fast-paced, smooth gameplay. After all, it is an arcade-style FPS that has followed the same basic formula for seven games. Unfortunately, with the movement feeling clunky and the added recoil, I'm not feeling the traditional gunplay from previous versions. People play the series because the unrealistic recoil, smooth gameplay, and easy kills make it fun. I'm not getting this feeling from MW3 and it's very disappointing. Other people complain that after two years of development, MW3 should at the very least look better. Sadly, I have to agree that the latest addition to the Call of Duty series feels like a lackluster attempt and is a disappointment to the players. I would be upset that I spent $60 and already strongly dislike the game after a few hours of multiplayer if I didn't plan on trading the game in at Amazon.com.

    Note: This is my honest, unbiased opinion. It's not because I have ill feelings towards IW or Treyarch. They gave us CoD2, 4, and Black Ops, and nothing can replace the fun I had while playing those games. Also, it's not because I'm "bad". Add me (AFTERHOURS 90) on XBL and you'll already know from experience, or see that I have had 3.00+ K/D ratios since CoD4.    … Expand
  8. Onibas
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    The same game all over again. What a rip-off. I just wasted 60.00 for a what seems to me to be DLC. The graphics look the same, the story is corny, the multiplayer is the same. I'll stick to Battlefield 3.
  9. RetroMUFC
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    This game is same game as Modern Warfare 2. It should have been DLC rather than a full release and is incredibly overpriced. Single player is repetitive and the multiplayer is nothing more than a map pack. Glad I rented it, at full price it's a ripoff.if you really want it wait a couple years when they have 4 more games in the series released and pick it up in the bargain bin.

    To top it    This game is same game as Modern Warfare 2. It should have been DLC rather than a full release and is incredibly overpriced. Single player is repetitive and the multiplayer is nothing more than a map pack. Glad I rented it, at full price it's a ripoff.if you really want it wait a couple years when they have 4 more games in the series released and pick it up in the bargain bin.

    To top it off today there is news that maps from the first two games are already on disc just waiting for you to pay that $10 "unlock" fee. Ridiculous.    … Expand
  10. TheVision
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Due to the flood of "hot" games coming this season, i decided to rent the new MW to check it out first - despite having previously bought every other entry since MW1. In retrospect this was personally a very wise decision after my experience the last few days. Note i like both the BF series and MW, there justt games and whichever is more fun takes the cake.

    The Good - When i first popped    Due to the flood of "hot" games coming this season, i decided to rent the new MW to check it out first - despite having previously bought every other entry since MW1. In retrospect this was personally a very wise decision after my experience the last few days. Note i like both the BF series and MW, there justt games and whichever is more fun takes the cake.

    The Good - When i first popped this game in and started the campaign i was quite blown away by the visual quality. Lets face it, this game LOOKS good. Just bought my first HDTV at the start of the year and there are few games that really pop with the 120hz.

    The Bad - This is where things get tricky. Like 25% into the campaign im completely lost as to whats really going on, i have a good idea of plot but the whole "being pulled into the story" isnt happening one bit. Its been awhile since i played mw2 but i also felt each gun had a little more characteristic. Several times in the campaign i had to check the name of my gun because they look and sound so similar i couldnt tell, if that was just a knob i didnt notice or a completely new AR. This carries into multi as i really cant feel a difference in many AR's as i did before. The M16's 3-round burst speed is atrocious compared to the other titles. And why does the barrett 50 cal semi-auto do just as much damage as a bolt action?? For some reason multiplayer just doesn't have the hook for me like before. It feels very much like the game "Homefront" only modded a little to match MW's style. I have no idea why they choose to put your challenges/ranks in tiny letters up in the top of the screen, it really takes the fun of progressing while playing away. As another reviewer said, they shouldn't have spent wayy to much time putting on the bells and whistles (or new killstreaks and weapon leveling) and focused on improving core gameplay. Everything they added has been an innovation in someone elses game. From the fore mentioned to the new gamemodes (btw enjoy playing kill confirmed WAY to much on ground war since they are trying to get people into it) And last but not least are the hit boxes/lag. Ive never seen as bad of lag on a few of the games i played in any other of there titles. And its just no fun when you run behind a wall and die when you know your safe. Or shoot 5 feet in front of a guy running and kill him. Its just cheesy.

    The Spec ops and survival is fun i guess, but many missions are rehashes of the other games and when you just want to get a quick game in, playing with just one other random person can get pretty boring awkward at times.

    I dont know how elite is doing, but i cant imagine paying for what essentially should be a "thank you for your support" service and be free or at least muchhh cheaper. The DLC is nice but 1% of the "elite" are going to take all the prizes you can win in tournys and stat tracking is free in other games. Really couldnt be more obvious in showing there intention of milking the cash cow.

    In conclusion for me this was and will be a rental game. I just dont see myself investing as much time as in previous titles. Gameplay may look better, but beauty is only skin deep.    … Expand
  11. AdrianShephard
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    This so called "Best game ever" is nothing more than some whipped up copy and past monstrosity. I can tell just by writing this, I'm going to be labeled a BF3 fanboy by all of the CoD zombies. I'm not. I'm fine with any game unless I play it and it's garbage. This is, and I'm glad I didn't wast 60 dollars and had someone give it to me FOR FREE because of how bad it was. This game might asThis so called "Best game ever" is nothing more than some whipped up copy and past monstrosity. I can tell just by writing this, I'm going to be labeled a BF3 fanboy by all of the CoD zombies. I'm not. I'm fine with any game unless I play it and it's garbage. This is, and I'm glad I didn't wast 60 dollars and had someone give it to me FOR FREE because of how bad it was. This game might as well be some **** DLC pack. The storymode feels like a convoluted, slapped together, rushed out failure that just tries to continue the story when the whole thing will keep you interested if you have the attention span of a microorganism, which is probably equal to the average CoD fanboy. This is what you get when you spend a year to make a game. Sure, they kept it the same because it works. Look at **** Valve though. They took 6 long years AND suffered being hacked, but they gave us Half Life 2, which is only good in the eyes of true gamers whereas CoD fanboys say that it sucks because it doesn't have HD graphics or Iron Sights. Moving right along, it's visibly clear that they just took models and textures from MW1 since they have LOADS of the same building models and textures from MW1. There's little kids who make original models, maps and textures for Garry's Mod, but developers for some big name company are so frigging lazy that they have to reuse the same models from a game they did 4 **** YEARS AGO?! Now, let's move on to the part I dreaded most; the multiplayer.I don't know about you, but I grew up with games like Half Life, Quake, and Counterstrike so I attempt to use that skill that I've accumulated in other games. Well, that's all in vain when it comes down to this asstastrophe, because it's just a mindless **** Example: I start up, and 1 second after spawning, I get pegged in the **** face with a throwing knife. How is that fair? That's cheap **** right there. That's only the beginning when you have people getting frigging choppers raining in a hellstorm of bullets with no way to stop it, people camping and getting continuous kills at your team's spawn, and the most overpowered perks that people got by wasting hours and braincells playing multiplayer. Even worse, when you try to use a sniper the right way by picking a spot and hiding, waiting for a target and a good shot, you get a thousand, prepubescent kids yelling over the mic saying, "YOU HARDSCOPING CAMPER NOOB!" and get the story about how they could quickscope better than me. They even award you for dying multiple times with deathstreaks- ooh yeah. Cheap **** like the ability to Kamikaze people with C4 to the ability to see where the guy murdering you is on the map are only some of them. Why the **** are you rewarding deaths? Dying should encourage you to better yourself, not just get **** kills with explosives. I've even seen little kids who purposely get killed just to get the C4 and get a 6 person kill later on. Speaking of little kids, there's thousands of them in this game, swearing every word in the **** book at everyone. And whatever you do, don't mention ANY OTHER GAMES otherwise you'll get bombarded with rage from everyone else. I just mentioned that I spent more time playing Counter Strike than CoD and the little kids and even some adults were saying "COUNTER STRIKE IS A NOOB GAME, IT SUCKS AND IT'S OLD AND COD IS BETTER, THE GRAPHICS SUCK!". It's almost insulting that they just rage at every other game. And on the topic of CS, the wager matches, A.K.A. Gun Game, was a total rip from CS. But oh "It's an original Idea" says the ****all developer. Thanks **** now whenever gungame and CS are mentioned in the same sentence, CoD fanboys will be the first to say Cs ripped it off when it was made before CoD even existed. So that's my thought on the multiplayer. Just a bunch of ripped off, cheap **** kid infested, garbage fest game modes. The only things left are the spec ops mode and survival, which are just as ****. Spec ops is more like Spec Ass because it's the same **** thing from MW2, which was as equally overrated and overhyped. Survival is fun for about a good hour or so before you lose your interest. It's sad to think that this series went from being pretty fun to being an outright attention whoring game that blinds so many people into thinking it's the best. There's so much more out there to choose from, but instead games are bashed for looking anything like CoD. So my final verdict is that it's a poorly made game and to all of the CoD worshippers out there, I just want to say that it's the same game and that you shouldn't just jump straight to blaming BF3 for everyone's rage and that graphics and Iron sights don't make a better shooter.… Expand
  12. williamthebludy
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Really disappointed. I bought this for the multiplayer and I haven't had any fun with it yet. Zero fun. Every map except 1 or 2 looks like the set of Sanford and Son, minus the quaint decor. I keep getting snagged on random pieces of garbage...it's so cluttered! When I do happen upon a stranger looking for a headache he just pops out of nowhere, and the killcam always shows me a differentReally disappointed. I bought this for the multiplayer and I haven't had any fun with it yet. Zero fun. Every map except 1 or 2 looks like the set of Sanford and Son, minus the quaint decor. I keep getting snagged on random pieces of garbage...it's so cluttered! When I do happen upon a stranger looking for a headache he just pops out of nowhere, and the killcam always shows me a different picture than what I saw. Not sure if it's lag, but I've never seen it so bad in a FPS before where I can unload a clip in a guy and he can teleport right in front of me for the stab. Oh and quick scoping is back. Like I needed another reason to light my face on fire. In all honesty, I really wanted this game to pan out because I'm not a huge Battlefield fan but it's just the same game as MW2 only worse. Kill confirmed.… Expand
  13. regasiz
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    What an atrocious disappointment. Modern Warfare 3 fails on nearly every forefront. It is unbelievable to think that something so utterly lazy could have been shat out by the biggest gaming franchise in the history of gaming. It is pitiful, not because little has changed, but because little has been improved upon. Modern Warfare 2 was shaken down by the general public for its lack ofWhat an atrocious disappointment. Modern Warfare 3 fails on nearly every forefront. It is unbelievable to think that something so utterly lazy could have been shat out by the biggest gaming franchise in the history of gaming. It is pitiful, not because little has changed, but because little has been improved upon. Modern Warfare 2 was shaken down by the general public for its lack of inspiration and connection to the gamer, and Modern Warfare 3 is the same old song and dance. Never have I felt more distanced from a developer whilst playing a game, EVER. The developers simply have no interest in making games for those who enjoy playing games. If some semblance of effort was noticeable in this silly-putty mold-your-own game was present, I would be more in favor of it. but it simply isn't. The gunplay is just as lacking as previous, and the campaign is a pitiful excuse to move you around as many "unique" settings as possible. At no point in this game was I engaged: I just sat down, mind rotting, mouth agape.

    I had big expectations for this fall: Battlefield 3 and MW3 would be a real clash of the titans, an end-all showdown to the slew of modern war games we have endured in the past decade. I was excited: this was the culmination of millions and millions of dollars' worth of effort, a decade of experience clashing to deliver the ultimate benchmark for the Modern War game. It never came round, though; it turns out that in a combat situation, MW3 croaks on the Battlefield.    … Expand
  14. Mephiso93
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Ce jeu me déçois énormément, pour ceux qui n'ont pas internet surtout ne l'acheter pas car en a peut prés 2H la campagne est fini. Ensuite voila le pire, le mode multijoueur, c'est juste une maps très très petite avec des campeurs planquer partout. La seul raison de l'acheter, est de jouer entre amisCe jeu me déçois énormément, pour ceux qui n'ont pas internet surtout ne l'acheter pas car en a peut prés 2H la campagne est fini. Ensuite voila le pire, le mode multijoueur, c'est juste une maps très très petite avec des campeurs planquer partout. La seul raison de l'acheter, est de jouer entre amis ou pour ceux qui sont accrocs a un point pas possible a l'histoire de MW2 ( j'en connais ), c'est de le prendre car c'est juste un MINI SUITE de ce jeu. De plus, le prix est énorme pour un jeu pareil, c'est carrément du foutage de gueule. Ceux qui disent qu'il est bien c'est surtout les campeurs qui doivent vous attendre déjà.… Expand
  15. Macksimus
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    I'm glad to see people stepping up and expressing how tired they are of a high quality but tired game! COD needs to evolve or die and because death isn't an option for this $1Billion+ giant at least we came express our disgust. The review sites are giving it incredibly high scores and part of me understands that because they are to review the game as a whole an it is a incredibly strongI'm glad to see people stepping up and expressing how tired they are of a high quality but tired game! COD needs to evolve or die and because death isn't an option for this $1Billion+ giant at least we came express our disgust. The review sites are giving it incredibly high scores and part of me understands that because they are to review the game as a whole an it is a incredibly strong title, I just wish they would have taken into consideration how redundant COD is and knock it down a point or two. Look at Battlefield 3, it pushed what everything as far as they could for our consoles and although buggy it has some of the most incredible moments in console multiplayer......ever and it's less than a month old! I wish that it wasn't a double standard. If the single player is great and the multiplayer is bad a game can still get a 100/95 or 90/9. Yet, if the single player is bad and the multiplayer is incredible a game gets a 8? I don't understand. I'll probably play Battlefield 3 for 200+ hours and because it's great at what it's suppose to be. Now, COD release an almost complete rehash of what it was two years ago and 100's and 90's by the handfuls!!! Boo, I say Boo!!! We need to start voting with our wallets and not our words on sites like this and maybe we'll see real change but as long as millions of sheep get in line to by COD we'll be plagued with its repeat non-innovative game play.… Expand
  16. killiana1a
    Nov 10, 2011
    2
    Talk about Tony Hawking or Guitar Heroing another series. There is nothing new here that one has not played before in Modern Warfare 2 or Black Ops. Sure, you get updated graphics on a tired Modern Warfare engine and a few new doodads. Yet, nothing game breaking or innovative. This series is going the way of Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero. Two great series who were milked dry by annual releases.
  17. Rajatehbunga
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    Spent days and months on online play alone on MW2 and COD4 MW..I knew they were gonna come up something similar with MW3 but i thought the slight changes and tweaks would still keep it fresh. Sad to say, MW3 dissapoints. Its just a stale bread. Dissapointing
  18. campo619
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    The makers of MW3 should be hanging their heads in shame for hyping this game up so much. I have read all the trash talk between the MW3 makers and Battlefield 3 makers saying that each game will out do the other but in all honesty MW3 has let me down beyond belief. It feels like a DLC for MW2, there is certainly nothing new to this title. The only thing I can notice is survival mode andThe makers of MW3 should be hanging their heads in shame for hyping this game up so much. I have read all the trash talk between the MW3 makers and Battlefield 3 makers saying that each game will out do the other but in all honesty MW3 has let me down beyond belief. It feels like a DLC for MW2, there is certainly nothing new to this title. The only thing I can notice is survival mode and weapon progression which is nothing but mediocre at best. I am a fan of both franchises but I have to say Battlefield has won this round. On another note, I find it very pathetic and outright embarrassing to be asking us gamers to post better user reviews and scores on metacritic. We are the fans and we support these works of art that you give us but when we find that we have been let down by you then and even though it may be a tough pill to swallow you must gulp down the criticism because we the consumers have definitely taken the loss of our hard earned cash like champions. No one likes stepping in the **** but hey it happens.… Expand
  19. stereomarlowe
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    Rent this for the single player - I'm not a hardcore gamer, but I completed it within about 5 hours... After playing most of the recent COD games since MW1, this is truly indistinguishable from what has come before. It's hard not to be cynical when loyal fans are coerced into upgrading for essentially the exact same experience. Even FIFA doesn't have this gall. Deja vu.
  20. MudTurkey13
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    The game is identical to Modern Warfare 2. The maps are uninspired and all very similar in scale and layout. If they wanted to sell it for $30 it would make a lot more sense, but instead they are making people pay an additional $50 a year to get extra maps and stat tracking that has been free on games in the past (Halo 2, World At War, etc.). Overall the game has very poor value forThe game is identical to Modern Warfare 2. The maps are uninspired and all very similar in scale and layout. If they wanted to sell it for $30 it would make a lot more sense, but instead they are making people pay an additional $50 a year to get extra maps and stat tracking that has been free on games in the past (Halo 2, World At War, etc.). Overall the game has very poor value for anyone who has ever played a shooter in the past (specifically Modern Warfare 2).… Expand
  21. monkeyblues
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    I am neither a Battlefield nor a COD fan. I play games that are entertaining and appealing to me. MW2 was fun and entertaining; I loved it! Black Ops, for me at least, was neither. When I loaded up MW3, I thought, "Hmm... Looks exactly like MW2. Same menu system, same menu options..." Once I loaded up the first mission, I was thoroughly underwhelmed. It's the same game! Sure the charactersI am neither a Battlefield nor a COD fan. I play games that are entertaining and appealing to me. MW2 was fun and entertaining; I loved it! Black Ops, for me at least, was neither. When I loaded up MW3, I thought, "Hmm... Looks exactly like MW2. Same menu system, same menu options..." Once I loaded up the first mission, I was thoroughly underwhelmed. It's the same game! Sure the characters and gun models are sharper, but it feels exactly the same! I tried spec ops and multiplayer, same thing; it's nearly exactly like MW2! I don't know how all the critics can say "Infinity Ward continues to push the limitations and capabilities of yada-yada..." It's the same darn game! So what if you add a few new perks and class abilities. That does not change the game fundamentals. This series has grown old and stale. I want innovation and that "wow" factor MW1 brought. This game is not worthy of the 6.5 million copies sold. Rent it, and you will agree.… Expand
  22. Jrichar3
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I feel like all they done was copy and paste mw2. Apart from a few new tricks with the Guns that's all they have done. Big let down and I will think twice before I buy another cod but then again what else is their to play. But mw3 is not the only game this year let the fans down… Expand
  23. evans7301
    Nov 17, 2011
    2
    This would have been a good map pack not a full game lacks anything with a real difference. The gameplay has not changed from modern warfare2. Blackops was a better game than this is and it wasn't even made by activision flagship infinty ward.
  24. TheBookofEli
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    Activision has clearly lost any integrity it once had. Rehash the same game every year, make boatloads of money. Thats the Call of Duty philosophy. At least until the consumer wises up.
  25. Exhilo
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    To laggy, nothing but running around, spawning close to enemy too frequently. I went back to playing MW2 and will checkout BF3 ....uh...when is MW4 coming out
  26. v0lten
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    I've never looked forward to a game more and been disappointed by a game so much. This game is a copy and paste job from hell. MW1 and MW2 were both exponentially better games than this. There are a few cool new features that are keeping me playing it now but I will be going back to Black Ops soon. I hope Treyarch makes the next CoD. IW and Sledgehammer dropped the ball bigtime on thisI've never looked forward to a game more and been disappointed by a game so much. This game is a copy and paste job from hell. MW1 and MW2 were both exponentially better games than this. There are a few cool new features that are keeping me playing it now but I will be going back to Black Ops soon. I hope Treyarch makes the next CoD. IW and Sledgehammer dropped the ball bigtime on this one. Horrible maps, sounds, footsteps, lobby wait times, everything! What happened to the playercards? How could this genius part of the game be dropped? I will NOT ever buy a COD game from IW.… Expand
  27. TrojanDynasty
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    Modern Warfare 3 is too much like Black Ops (which I dont care for) and not enough like Modern Warfare 2 (which I loved). Overall, I doubt I will play this game very much.
  28. ailfawka
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    I guess I'm kinda a COD fan still, even after allot of disappointment in the past....and well still not impressed even with mw3's release. They really could have done so much better...essentially what I'm seeing is activision juicing every last bit of $$ and making fools out of the consumers because there in a good position to do so. they asked for a honest review on twitter, they got it!I guess I'm kinda a COD fan still, even after allot of disappointment in the past....and well still not impressed even with mw3's release. They really could have done so much better...essentially what I'm seeing is activision juicing every last bit of $$ and making fools out of the consumers because there in a good position to do so. they asked for a honest review on twitter, they got it! why is it that activision have to request for people to give a supposed "honest review" when really there calling for all the fanboys to give a biased review? so that they can potentially get sales up? these reviews do not benefit the people, they just set the fundemental basics up to take advantage of even more people while they still have the ability to do so...cash cow! I would have given a 4/10 but due to there unethical marketing its now a 2/10… Expand
  29. snorlax
    Nov 12, 2011
    2
    MW3 fails to meet my expectations. Pros are that multiplayer weapons are somewhat different to MW2, still proving to be more "modern-like" which is good. Also Special Ops has actually been a major improvement (the only reason i rate it 2/10). Singleplayer - didn't expect it to be amazing as most fps multiplayer games tend to be short and just a "glimpse" of the overall game. Storyline wasMW3 fails to meet my expectations. Pros are that multiplayer weapons are somewhat different to MW2, still proving to be more "modern-like" which is good. Also Special Ops has actually been a major improvement (the only reason i rate it 2/10). Singleplayer - didn't expect it to be amazing as most fps multiplayer games tend to be short and just a "glimpse" of the overall game. Storyline was good though. Cons are that the maps are too small. Very hard to get killstreaks and feels way too rushed. As a fan of both MW2 and BO, i think the game's dynamics were changed too much. I would've preferred multiplayer to be just an upgrade of MW2, including changes to the levels and killstreaks and a few tweaks to the perks. The thing with franchise releases is that we learn to love them for what they are, so why change that??? This game is like the reject child of the family, rushed out too early & failing to meet 2011 benchmarks. This game feels oddly strange to play, even though it's part of the Call of Duty series it's nothing like the predecessors. Also the fact that you have to wait to level up before the better perks are available, given that you get little ammo for weapons to begin with and the perks are in the wrong sequence. Big shame to the developers of this game as it hasn't lived up to the hype. Hard to say if the franchise should make big changes or not to the series, I for one prefer just an "upgrade" rather than major changes. My vote goes to BF3 this year for the better FPS shooter.… Expand
  30. Maxisone
    Nov 12, 2011
    2
    Story line is dated. Graphics is dated (Clearly using the same MW2 graphics engine) and whats worse is that it is quite visibly less vibrant and washed out ; (Would it have hurt to actually put some work into not making the user name icons and profiles look like they are all they same color or have the same tint? Added to that. The introduction picture to quite a few maps look way tooStory line is dated. Graphics is dated (Clearly using the same MW2 graphics engine) and whats worse is that it is quite visibly less vibrant and washed out ; (Would it have hurt to actually put some work into not making the user name icons and profiles look like they are all they same color or have the same tint? Added to that. The introduction picture to quite a few maps look way too similar. Which gives the impression that some maps are designed way too close to each other in terms of major elements and not enough unique and differentiating factors were used.

    The multiplayer maps and engine are an abomination. Lets start with the maps. No general flow for movement. No central areas. Way too many open lines, hidden side doors and passageways that realistically makes absolutely no sense and also there's too much crap lying around which obstructs simple general movement and makes making a quick getaway almost impossible if your in close quarters and being shot at. Whats even more annoying is that in a lot of instances you recover (Reload/Wait for damage to wear off) from a firefight only to be shot in the back by the opposing team who just spawns conveniently just a few feet away.
    At the end of the experience pretty much your either too scared to move out of fear for being shot in the side or back or you sit there and have someone spawn behind you and get you from a side door.
    I am acutely aware camping is frowned upon but for more deliberate assault rifle players like myself who like to slowly move around the map using the stick and move approach and not running with a smg within a pack of 3 to 4 people this game is a non starter. If you cannot be allowed time to retreat to somewhat safe spots on the map for a few seconds to lick your wounds and reload then i think your maps need some work done to it. Additionally, the icing on the cake is the fact that there is no immunity when you spawn. Probably there was never any spawn immunity in the previous cod's i dont know but i have never been spawn killed in previous cods as much i have been in this game. It appears to be a regular thing to be able to spawn kill at will while in Black ops the only time i can remember being ever spawn killed was on its smallest map (Nuketown) and tactical insertions were involved.
    I have no problems with Black Ops and MW2 but for MW3 I think you guys missed the mark by a longshot.    … Expand
  31. Qwerty95
    Nov 12, 2011
    2
    While the campaign is certainly fast paced and at times exciting, it doesn't have the same fun factor that the original Modern Warfare had and the online is more of the same we've seen for years If activision wants this series to survive they need to change up the formula
  32. westonx
    Nov 12, 2011
    2
    First of all, I am (was) a massive Modern Warfare fan and hate, HATE Battlefield, although the recent campaign in BF3 was pretty fun (I borrowed it), I've always thought the multiplayer sucked. The positive, I really enjoyed the campaign, it felt epic, plenty of twists and turns along the way and at the end of the rollercoaster, I felt satisfied, I won't say anymore as I don't want to giveFirst of all, I am (was) a massive Modern Warfare fan and hate, HATE Battlefield, although the recent campaign in BF3 was pretty fun (I borrowed it), I've always thought the multiplayer sucked. The positive, I really enjoyed the campaign, it felt epic, plenty of twists and turns along the way and at the end of the rollercoaster, I felt satisfied, I won't say anymore as I don't want to give anything away. But then again the campaign was worked on by Infinity Ward.

    Now, the negative. Infinity Ward, people buy your games for the multiplayer, why then did you entrust it's development to a third party? Sledgehammer have dropped the ball completely on this one. Why does it feel as though I am moving in a tar pit in this game, it's SO sluggish, traversing the maps feels like a chore, I've tried everything to combat it, extreme conditioning, changing the sensitivity, nothings worked. Secondly, to make the Assault Rifles/SMG's range more "muted" for realism purposes yet allow quickscoping is a nonsensical double standard. There is a certain trade off to be had with sniper rifles, power and accuracy at range but not good within CQC, people should not be able to use snipers as shotguns, by not removing quickscoping you have allowed this imbalance to continue within your games. The weapons handle horribly and feel much like Black Ops, (which I hated), wherein kills are less about precision and more about rattling of shot after shot towards the target hoping to see a hit marker, gaining proficiencies does little good. Some of the maps work ok (Resistance, Village), others are horribly designed and impossible to traverse about 10 feet without getting shot from one of the myriad unseen spots or by the guy that has just inexplicably spawned right behind your back (Interchange, Bootleg). I read an interview with one of the developers who said it was "too easy" to get killed in MW2, really? So it's easy to avoid being shot in the back by a terrible spawning algorithm in MW3? Ha. I turned off my Xbox last night after "running" half way across the map Seatown, only to see a sniper, and start shooting with my G36C, red dot and "stability" proficiency on, I was 15 feet away from him, the gun hopelessly rattles bullets anywhere but at him, I got two hit markers with this "muted" weapon and bang he'd quickscoped me, two seconds later I spawn right in front of him as he's running towards our team and he quickscopes me again before I'd even seen him. Any weapon in this game that is not a sniper is terrible at range but then again the sniper can be use in in mid and close range combat as well. Sums it up really. I'll be trading it in for Skyrim.

    I'm not saying I wouldn't buy another Modern Warfare title but I'll be renting it the next time before dropping 40 quid on it, if I like after renting, I'll buy it.

    I didn't expect innovation or a million new features but I also didn't expect a lot of the things that made this a successful franchise to be removed or disappear, so in summary, thanks for the awful spawning system, sluggish movement, imbalanced weapons and poor maps. A note to Mr Glen Schofield, the scores aren't "suspiciously low", a lot of people really did play the game and hate it, take responsibility and look at how you can fix it instead of blaming it on Battlefield fanboys, most of them are busy playing BF3 a game which seems to have lived up to it's fans/users expectations, something you failed to achieve.    … Expand
  33. mrchi47
    Nov 12, 2011
    2
    I can`t believe that Activision can make record breaking sales on a game that has next to no innovation since Modern Warfare 2. The part that really baffles me is that IW claims to have started working on this game within a couple weeks after the release of MW2, yet after 2 years they have accomplished barely anything. The running animations make me LOL too, so glad I picked BF3 up insteadI can`t believe that Activision can make record breaking sales on a game that has next to no innovation since Modern Warfare 2. The part that really baffles me is that IW claims to have started working on this game within a couple weeks after the release of MW2, yet after 2 years they have accomplished barely anything. The running animations make me LOL too, so glad I picked BF3 up instead of this game. Good buy COD, hopefully this will end the genre… Expand
  34. djWAX
    Nov 13, 2011
    2
    This is Call of Duty: Black Ops. This is also Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. Treyarch found a winning formula way back when, realized it, and have been milking this cash cow ever since. What was a relatively creative game and a solid step forward 5 years ago, hasn't changed in the slightest. The engine it runs on is 10 years old, and it shows. The flashes of yellow "100+"s and theThis is Call of Duty: Black Ops. This is also Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. Treyarch found a winning formula way back when, realized it, and have been milking this cash cow ever since. What was a relatively creative game and a solid step forward 5 years ago, hasn't changed in the slightest. The engine it runs on is 10 years old, and it shows. The flashes of yellow "100+"s and the constant unlocks keep the dopamine rushing as fanboys continue to fork over their parents' money to get the exact same game every year, and this is no different. The good news? Once you reach level 80, you can opt to destroy all of your progress and start the entire unlocking progress all over again, all for a single "prestige" level. Makes sense, right?… Expand
  35. Yojik1610
    Nov 13, 2011
    2
    Sierra class submarine in epicenter of battle?? Seriously??? Sailing through the mines in the water? Jesus Christ this bull**t is even greater then bull**t about Chev Chelios who survived after falling from the helicopter. But if "Crank: High Voltage" is the new, real crazy and funny story about Chev, "MW3" is absolutely the same game as the "MW2". No progress, no fun, no innovations inSierra class submarine in epicenter of battle?? Seriously??? Sailing through the mines in the water? Jesus Christ this bull**t is even greater then bull**t about Chev Chelios who survived after falling from the helicopter. But if "Crank: High Voltage" is the new, real crazy and funny story about Chev, "MW3" is absolutely the same game as the "MW2". No progress, no fun, no innovations in the game experience. Just maybe stupidest and predictable story about WW 3.… Expand
  36. HellRazor316
    Nov 13, 2011
    2
    If you've played MW2, prepare for more of the same. Nothing groundbreaking or ambitious from this game, already traded it in, huge letdown. Perhaps if people bought games for their quality and not just because it's 'cod' the developers would be forced to put some effort into creating a fresh, engaging game. Sadly, they simply phoned this one in. As for the skippable offensive content,If you've played MW2, prepare for more of the same. Nothing groundbreaking or ambitious from this game, already traded it in, huge letdown. Perhaps if people bought games for their quality and not just because it's 'cod' the developers would be forced to put some effort into creating a fresh, engaging game. Sadly, they simply phoned this one in. As for the skippable offensive content, unnecessary and screams that they are desperate for publicity. Save your money and rent it if u need to play it.… Expand
  37. tdgirard
    Nov 13, 2011
    2
    I recently played this Call Of Duty and finished it, and I can say it was no joy ride. Calling MW 2.5 seems very appropriate. I'm not a hater of the franchise. I've played every C.O.D out there and I stopped getting interested after C.O.D 4. MW3 sports the same formula like the last 2 before it and that's what makes it feel the same. Given that there are slight changes to somethings;I recently played this Call Of Duty and finished it, and I can say it was no joy ride. Calling MW 2.5 seems very appropriate. I'm not a hater of the franchise. I've played every C.O.D out there and I stopped getting interested after C.O.D 4. MW3 sports the same formula like the last 2 before it and that's what makes it feel the same. Given that there are slight changes to somethings; shooting, physics, and graphics still look and feel the same. Now that another C.O.D has said to becoming out next year (surprise) I hope whom ever makes it leaves the comfort of the C.O.D bubble and changes the series completely. Take a step outside of the box and change the formula, use a new graphics engine, and let's not make it about Russians. Seeing as Nazis have been over killed in the games, it seems the whole terrorists working with Russians or visa versa will get old as well if it already hasn't. And yes that goes for Battlefield. I've heard that the game feels like a $60 dollar add-on and that's what it does feel like. Did I pay for the name or the game? Probably the name. If anyone from Activision reads this, take some pointers from EA and DICE, and expand and change and try new things with your game. So far your a one trick pony and after awhile your oohs and ahhhs will become boos and blahs. I'd be bad if you ran the C.O.D franchise in the ground like you did Guitar Hero. And how did you manage to do that? By releasing more than one every year and sometimes more than one a year. Step back Activision, sit down, think on how you can take the C.O.D franchise in a new direction. Id like to see change.… Expand
  38. bones3131
    Nov 23, 2011
    2
    I've had this game now since release date. What a waste of money. I've bought the last 4 COD games and i feel really ripped off by this one. There's barely anything new about. Just an update. Should have read the reviews here before i went and spent 55 quid on it. Absolute mess of a game. This will be the last game in the series I will buy.
  39. Numba1Evfan
    Nov 13, 2011
    2
    i played MW3 on first day expecting it to be like the best multiplayer experience, but sadly they brought back the same crappy game play from cod 4 in, it contains so many bugs its not funny it took to grenades to kill somebody and i actually got a hit maker with a F'in KNIFE like cmon and somehow u can dodge a RPG in mid air by ducking, same with bullets. Not only did they have ani played MW3 on first day expecting it to be like the best multiplayer experience, but sadly they brought back the same crappy game play from cod 4 in, it contains so many bugs its not funny it took to grenades to kill somebody and i actually got a hit maker with a F'in KNIFE like cmon and somehow u can dodge a RPG in mid air by ducking, same with bullets. Not only did they have an overload of bugs but they pretty much have a random spawn system no there is no enemy side ally side like in MW2 now its more like guerrilla warfare, i really think the only good things of this game are campaign, dedicated servers , and the strongest thing survival which it a combination of zombies and horde i am definetly considering selling this a trading for battle field 3.… Expand
  40. WrathOfKhan
    Nov 13, 2011
    2
    I loved Modern Warfare 2. I loved Black Ops and all the changes it brought. But, i HATE Modern Warfare 3. Its basically a map pack. Pros: large maps, great graphics, easier to kill people (i.e. doesn't take a full clip), new game modes like the tag game, nerfed snipers. Cons: too many sub menus. they aren't intuitive. Doesn't have dedicated server so I've been notice lag again.I loved Modern Warfare 2. I loved Black Ops and all the changes it brought. But, i HATE Modern Warfare 3. Its basically a map pack. Pros: large maps, great graphics, easier to kill people (i.e. doesn't take a full clip), new game modes like the tag game, nerfed snipers. Cons: too many sub menus. they aren't intuitive. Doesn't have dedicated server so I've been notice lag again. And if you're the host, you're at a disadvantage. the perk packages are confusing and aren't straight forward. I loved Black Ops and how you could create your own character in the manner you wanted. The purchase system rocked - as did the wager matches. The maps are too busy which makes it hard to pick up players. I hate the new system in non-hardcore that doesn't let you see what team someone is on unless they are close. That's what hardcore is for. They are allowing knifing across the room again. and finally, the environment isn't destructible. after playing BF3, that is one of the things I loved. it keeps the game changing and never stagnant. it also helps keep campers from staying in the same spot since you can blow the hell out of it.

    overall, MW3 was a big disappointment. I usually LOVE call of duty games but this felt like nothing more than a map pack with a step backwards from Black Ops because of the confusing menus, undoing the purchasing system, lack of combat training to get to know the maps, and overall feel of the game.

    after this, I'm moving to battlefield 3. it's a far superior game. Call of duty, you suck now. You could have come out with an amazing product and built on the success of black ops. but you struck out.

    things they can do to improve: get dedicated servers, get destructible environment, bring back the the purchase system    … Expand
  41. GamerCorps
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    I have played all the COD games, I don't play BF3 because it does not appeal to me. The new Modern Warfare 3 just seems like a unfinished product. 90% of the buildings you cant go inside, you can't get on top of cars, the maps are too small, and their is crap laying everywhere that you have move around.

    I am very disappointed in this game. The spawning is the worst I have ever seen,    I have played all the COD games, I don't play BF3 because it does not appeal to me. The new Modern Warfare 3 just seems like a unfinished product. 90% of the buildings you cant go inside, you can't get on top of cars, the maps are too small, and their is crap laying everywhere that you have move around.

    I am very disappointed in this game. The spawning is the worst I have ever seen, the minute you get a kill someone who spawned behind you is shooting you in the back, the lag is horrible, I keep hearing something about lag compensation? whatever it is it made the game worse. Their are already 10th prestige lobbies!

    i am reading now how Sledge Hammer Games is begging people that like the game to go to Metacritic and give a good review because their ratings are so low, how pathetic is that? Their are loads of people on the Modern warfare 3 website asking for the developer to give them some feedback about all the issues and what their plans are to fix it, I have yet to see any response from the developer giving any re-assurance to their customers that it is being looked into.

    The reason why people are still playing the game is because it is new and they haven't given up on it yet, but if it doesn't get fixed it will be in that big metal box at Best Buy in front of the checkouts with a $9.99 price tag!

    The reason this game had record sale was because of the millions in crafty advertising, and the paid for critic reviews they get by giving out free game copies.

    I will hang on to my copy in hopes that Sledge Hammer an Activision step up to the plate and fix this, but if they don't, it will be the last product I buy from either of these developers.    … Expand
  42. fetchlives
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    I was really looking forward to MW3, especially after being massively disappointed with how corny battlefield 3 was. In the beginning things looked promising, but as you play the multiplayer you realize a few things. On the positive side:

    1. I do like how they have dealt with killstreaks this time. you can do support or assault. either way you'll probably be able to call in some sort of    I was really looking forward to MW3, especially after being massively disappointed with how corny battlefield 3 was. In the beginning things looked promising, but as you play the multiplayer you realize a few things. On the positive side:

    1. I do like how they have dealt with killstreaks this time. you can do support or assault. either way you'll probably be able to call in some sort of reward and it keeps that part of the game fun. And the killstreak rewards are the most fun yet. they are hilarious - the robot from short-circuit buzzin around shooting guys is so funny.

    2. Some new guns are fun. And I like the new perk system.



    On the negative side

    1. The spawn points are ridiculous. Either you spawn behind someone and shoot them in the back, they spawn behind you and shoot you on the back, maybe you'll spawn off in the middle of nowhere, if you're lucky you are put with your team in a location where you can choose how to get back into the fight but that's rare. I just finished a match where I spawned behind a guy, shot him in the back, a guy spawned behind me and shot me in the back and he spawned in front of one of my team and was immediately shot in the back. ALL on ONE killcam. So lame.

    2. these maps are garbage. just chaotic garbage. no flow, rarely any strategic positions, no battleground. **** just hits the fan everywhere. and they are all SO small. 3. There is no flow. Because of the spawn locations and the cluttered map design the matches are too chaotic. There is rarely an actual battle ground you expect to be fighting over it's just totally random. 3. I understand the desire to cool it on the camping, but with scavenger you can't even re-up on flash grenades. 4. seriously what is with this quick scoping business? I understand it takes practice to get it down but like guys are cruising through hallways with their sniper rifles as shotguns. that's so stupid. It's a glitch which is being exploited. sure it's hard to do it's just goofy.

    5. speaking of shotguns they are primary weapons again. the secondary weapons are so lame. like you got an assault rifle good for 30 yards + up and then some wack machine pistol good if you can sneak up on ONE guy to empty the whole clip and then get smoked by their team while you reload. I basically have to use my primary weapon as some catch-all supergun.

    6. it's SO dark.

    7. aimbots? come on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fj3B3NQNyPY

    8. I'm going back and playing mw2    … Expand
  43. JasonSuperior
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    It really does feel like a tweaked version of MW2.. Also feels like a map pack.. except for the fact that I'm pretty sure that they made all the maps by throwing darts at pictures of broken cars and buildings.. then they just said "yea that looks great".. the maps honestly are absolutely atrocious.. each one could have been named "junk city" or "hilly junk area" or maybe even "junkyardIt really does feel like a tweaked version of MW2.. Also feels like a map pack.. except for the fact that I'm pretty sure that they made all the maps by throwing darts at pictures of broken cars and buildings.. then they just said "yea that looks great".. the maps honestly are absolutely atrocious.. each one could have been named "junk city" or "hilly junk area" or maybe even "junkyard with extra junk"... Well congratulations.. you made your money.. just.. please.. for the love of god.. just be honest and don't throw so much hype in there like you are doing something so new and innovative when all it is is a copy paste of your last game...… Expand
  44. Robbie666
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    After playing all the call of duty games and hating them all apart from 1,2&4 i though MW3 would step to the plate considering the high quality of games that have been released at this time.......i was very wrong. The singleplayer is cold i dont feel attatched to any of the characters like i did on the original modern warfare, the level design is your generic fps you can only go one way,After playing all the call of duty games and hating them all apart from 1,2&4 i though MW3 would step to the plate considering the high quality of games that have been released at this time.......i was very wrong. The singleplayer is cold i dont feel attatched to any of the characters like i did on the original modern warfare, the level design is your generic fps you can only go one way, the AI is what you expect. The graphics compared to the streets of NYC in crysis to look very out dated now, the gun sounds in the game still sound like your firing a potato shooter, i could go on.............

    Multiplayer is the same i got 30 kills on TDM on my first try on the game, i couldnt give a **** about all the weapon upgrades cause its easy to kill people in the first place, i always hated killstreaks...... i think its cheating. if you want to play fps online that needs skill or teamwork play counter strike or wait for the xbox live release of it.

    The spec ops modes are fun but didnt keep me occupied for long.

    all in all MW3 has been lazily put together over the last year to create another half arsed money making game which is really dissapointing in which 2007 MW came out and blew my mind, but anyways im sure next year activison will bring out ANOTHER piece of crap.    … Expand
  45. jasonc
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    Another year, another MW game. Same old, same old. The gameplay has not changed, the graphics are dated, the story is predictable. The series needs to innovate. This game is not recommended, there are so many games in fall 2011 that your $60 is better spent on.
  46. Cheyney
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    I've always liked the Modern Warfare series. The single player story has never been more than uninspired and insipid, but multiplayer has always been the series' strong point. There have always been issues with spawning, and being killed often felt cheap and merely unlucky rather than being genuinely out-fought and out-thought, but these problems are accepted as part of the experience as aI've always liked the Modern Warfare series. The single player story has never been more than uninspired and insipid, but multiplayer has always been the series' strong point. There have always been issues with spawning, and being killed often felt cheap and merely unlucky rather than being genuinely out-fought and out-thought, but these problems are accepted as part of the experience as a realistic war simulator, where death really can come down to a moment's bad luck.

    Mechanically, the game is as sound as ever. If something is shot it dies, if something is caught in an explosion it dies, if something is hurt and stays out of danger for a few moments it chalks up the injury as a lesson learned and gets back into the game that much more competent.

    The story, a lacklustre affair, is half of the deal-breaker. Playing through on 'Regular' difficulty (the average setting for those unfamiliar with in-game terminology) I was able to complete the campaign in five hours. Even though multiplayer as always been the most important component for the majority of players, this doesn't excuse how shockingly short the single player portion is. Put simply, the single player would be fairly priced at a quarter of its current level.

    The multiplayer also utterly fails to stand up to its ancestry. The core gameplay mechanics are almost completely unaltered from previous games, and even then draws upon the worst the series has offered. The inadequate weaponry system from Black Ops makes a wholly unwanted return, and idle sway on weaponry, rightly criticised in the first Modern Warfare and therefore dropped to universal praise, has returned. Many weapons still feature glaring inconsistencies with their real-world counterparts, and as often as not the newly introduced ordinance comes across as older weapons physically remodelled but functionally unaltered. The issues with hitboxes seem unresolved, and the problems with spawning and balancing of teams have clearly had no attention, despite being some of the most popular criticisms of the series as a whole. In short, the game is mechanically IDENTICAL to its immediate predecessor, Modern Warfare 2, with newly introduced weaponry having nothing to distinguish it from older weapons save new models.

    The multiplayer maps themselves feel uninspired and unbalanced, with poor flow and confusing, unintuitive layouts and reference points, although this seems part of the long-term strategy to force players into buying expensive map pack DLC in order to actually enjoy the multiplayer experience they paid so much for to begin with.

    This is the real deal-breaker: Black Ops, a game released barely a year ago, has pumped out four DLC map packs at a price of £10 each, pushing many players to part with up to £100 for a complete experience - a hefty price for a multiplayer-only game in anyone's book. Within two months a new DLC map pack WILL have been released for this game, meaning that in a year the Call of Duty series could have soaked up £170 of your money, without even going into special edition prices. That is, put simply, a lot of money for something that is almost functionally identical to something that most players already purchased two years ago.

    A final gripe is the graphics. This should never be something that influences the purchase of a game, and yet here it does. The engine seems to have remained fundamentally unaltered since the first Modern Warfare four years ago, and put simply, it is badly showing its age. General texturing quality actually seems to have DECREASED in some areas, something which should not be happening in any series, ever. One can only presume makers Infinity Ward spent the last two years deciding on how to make the launch multiplayer maps so poor in quality that purchasers would be forced to buy their exorbitantly priced DLC.

    In short, the Call of Duty series releases a new game every year, and this seems to prevent enough time being taken to actually fully pad out the final product. The single player feels rushed and cut-down, the engine seems to be unaltered, and overall the multiplayer seems to consist of a gimmicky DLC set of games and a poor-quality map pack. Most of what's new is just older code with a new coat of paint, and what's genuinely new is stolen from other, better-made games. If you have a previous instalment of the Call of Duty series, there is literally nothing to recommend this game for anything beyond a rental.    … Expand
  47. polecat987
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I'm a military buff and 3 years ago decided to get a 360 to remember those days of fun playing ps2. My first real FPS was MW2. It was a great game and introduced me into a world of multiplayer gaming that I never experienced. But MW3 seems exactly like MW2. The story-line obviously had to continue but a lot of the game-play should have been revised. The part on MW3 with the flashlights that you have to duck is pretty much the same one in WaW where you had to go prone to evade some guys with flamethrowers. The sniping mission to kill Makarov, the same idea of WaW where you had to kill a general, but now in MW3 the outcome is different. Also for some reason when you get hit you flinch and your rifle blocks your vision and you cant shoot, also the grenade spamming is outrageous by putting these 2 things they make the game difficult. Essentially this is MW2.5 it should have been a DLC for 30 bucks not a full game or waited another year to release it. Multiplayer is exactly the same as always the maps are very narrow and small, vehicles and buildings are recycled from MW2 (not even a try to make a difference between the two). The initial menu on the game may have been good and easy to navigate in MW2 but come on Sledgehammer and IW at least you should have changed it completely because is the same one from MW2 but with different colors. Those things show a great deal of laziness on the part of these guys. Battlefield 3 is not a perfect game but and let be it clear I played Bad Company 2 this summer so I'm not a fan of it. But the multiplayer options to play anywhere you want is a plus MW3 doesn't have. MW3 is now a game to run run and run, do quick-scopes and keep running and killing. I would dare to say that Black Ops still is a better game. A 2 because as a fan of the series I expected more options and a different game-play style and because the story has gotten repetitive and predictable.CoD has gotten to be the same over and over and it stops to be fun.… Expand
  48. Tazzieplaya
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    Let me be honest here, I'm a lover of all things CoD but this is a DLC, paying $80 Aus for this is a ripoff. After Black ops I assumed looking at the game trailers (which were for the campaign mode) that this game would look hot and we would be playing multi player in Paris, London, New York......nope, just the usual junkyard enviroment. Maps are horrible. Points system was a plus butLet me be honest here, I'm a lover of all things CoD but this is a DLC, paying $80 Aus for this is a ripoff. After Black ops I assumed looking at the game trailers (which were for the campaign mode) that this game would look hot and we would be playing multi player in Paris, London, New York......nope, just the usual junkyard enviroment. Maps are horrible. Points system was a plus but that's far to little for $80 Aus. Don't kid yourself it is MW2.5 folks. Never hated on a CoD game in my life. Hope Treyarch can come up with something to better this Infinity Ward/Sledgehammer dog's breakfast of a franchise. I'M GOING BACK TO CoD BLACK OPS!!!!!!!! This game blows!!!!!… Expand
  49. JayHawk_III
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    After reading the reviews & watching game play on YouTube I have a hard time disagreeing with the massive negative comments. This game hasn't changed at all, it graphics are the same as all the other COD games pryor. It would be more embarrassing for me to have this games achievements on my list, than it would having Viva Pinata's. At least with Viva Pinata I would probably be entertainedAfter reading the reviews & watching game play on YouTube I have a hard time disagreeing with the massive negative comments. This game hasn't changed at all, it graphics are the same as all the other COD games pryor. It would be more embarrassing for me to have this games achievements on my list, than it would having Viva Pinata's. At least with Viva Pinata I would probably be entertained with something new... The only way I would even consider purchasing this game is if the world ran out of toliet paper & I needed to use the instruction manuel to clean myself...… Expand
  50. ninty42
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    This call of duty is the worst one I've played and I only take issue with the multiplayer component. I have played this game for one week and in this week I have experienced many matches lost due to bullet lag connections to the host being lost. The worst thing in this game is the camping if anything this game allows more camping than the past games there is just to many spots to sit andThis call of duty is the worst one I've played and I only take issue with the multiplayer component. I have played this game for one week and in this week I have experienced many matches lost due to bullet lag connections to the host being lost. The worst thing in this game is the camping if anything this game allows more camping than the past games there is just to many spots to sit and just pick people off with out having to put any effort in. Another thing that feels broken is the re-spawning which places you way to close to the enemies and vice versa effectively stopping you from continuing your kill streak . Despite having 2 studios working on this game you can actually notice the drop in quality now that half of the original infinity ward team has left activision this game was rushed and should of stayed in development for a longer time instead of pushing it out so quickly just to make money. The only thing i feel that this game got right was the the story and the spec op missions which are the only things I play right now because multiplayer is so unplayable. I will be selling this game really soon probably in the next few days and this is the last call of duty I will ever buy because it will never be the same as it once was. I really hope this franchise goes the way of guitar hero and just disappears and people forget about it.… Expand
  51. Aristane
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    i dont know about the rest of you but i'm getting tired of devs just repackaging a game with upgraded graphics and charging full price for what amounts to just a multi player. what ever happened to an engaging story that made you feel something for the characters.
  52. adam1121
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    I may have only played the game's multiplayer, but let's get serious here. Why do 90% of people buy this game? For the multiplayer. I'd say that the multiplayer can be split into two parts: the weapons, upgrade system, and gameplay and the maps and servers. I am overall pleased with the weapons and the killstreaks and such, although they do seem a bit worse than the MW2 system, so i giveI may have only played the game's multiplayer, but let's get serious here. Why do 90% of people buy this game? For the multiplayer. I'd say that the multiplayer can be split into two parts: the weapons, upgrade system, and gameplay and the maps and servers. I am overall pleased with the weapons and the killstreaks and such, although they do seem a bit worse than the MW2 system, so i give those a 5. The maps and servers however are terrible. The lag is tremendous because there are no dedicated servers and the maps are the worst of the past 4 COD games. They are flat with no multi-level fighting and awfully cluttered. Overall they are a disaster and receive a 0, therefore this game rates a 2 on my scale because it doesn't deserve to be rounded up.… Expand
  53. Killa_Tex
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    Bad $60 for a game that is a glorified DLC. Anyone who disputes this either is a lunitic or will adore anything that is thrown at them with CoD attached to it. If this was 2009, and this had this been MW2 I would have given it a solid 9.5, but it's not.......it's 2011 for crying out loud! Have to say this is a sad day in gaming where you can be fed the same ol S*** and people either sayBad $60 for a game that is a glorified DLC. Anyone who disputes this either is a lunitic or will adore anything that is thrown at them with CoD attached to it. If this was 2009, and this had this been MW2 I would have given it a solid 9.5, but it's not.......it's 2011 for crying out loud! Have to say this is a sad day in gaming where you can be fed the same ol S*** and people either say ..yeah well that other game is crap too......I DIDN"T buy the other game! I bought this one, and now I'm stuck with it or I can trade it back for a loss. Might have to give that "other game" a try. You guys taking up for this cooperate giant who just took you for a easy $60 as you defend them...you deserve getting ripped off.....Hope it ends up in the bargin bin where it belongs (after I unload it) giving it a 3 is kind the Campaign mode was good but.......not why I bought it .....MW2.1 folks… Expand
  54. agentissmith
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    MW3 stinks. When I first played MW1 my jaw dropped off the floor. And then when I got MW2 I did not see any improvements. After that I realized that what Activision really wanted is our $$. Since then I avoid COD's and MW's.
  55. thelightfang
    Nov 14, 2011
    2
    This game, while it is essentially another CoD game, sucks. Yes, they used old elements in the game. Yes, they changed very minor details. However, they didn't change anything for the better. The Campaign and Special Ops portions of the game are great. They are really nice, with good delivery and challenge. The multiplayer, arguably the biggest part of the game, is what I have a problemThis game, while it is essentially another CoD game, sucks. Yes, they used old elements in the game. Yes, they changed very minor details. However, they didn't change anything for the better. The Campaign and Special Ops portions of the game are great. They are really nice, with good delivery and challenge. The multiplayer, arguably the biggest part of the game, is what I have a problem with. They brought in new guns and perks, gun levels, and gun perks. Those are all very good. But, some of the new guns are extremely over-powered. The game has been sped up to make it better for people who like to rush in. There is very little strategy involved, especially in the modes of Team Deathmatch and Kill Confirmed. The only strategy there is "look here, look there, try not to get shot, and kill enemies as fast as possible". This game is really built for the types of players who want to race to see who can get the best score, the fastest. The last part is what I have a problem with. It also seems like the maps have been made more compact, with shorter ranges of sight requiring faster reactions and higher sensitivities. In addition with the fact that players move more quickly, this makes the game frustratingly fast-paced. It's so sped up, in fact, that the fire-rate on most of the automatic weapons makes it seem like someone hit you once and killed you. This is a step down from the level of Black Ops. It's probably even worse than MW2. I suggest to anyone considering getting this game to take little stock in the "critics" who gave this game high scores, and instead listen to the actual players. Instead of this game, get Skyrim, Saints the Third, Battlefield 3, or something else that you find interesting, because this game is not worth a $60 investment.… Expand
  56. ccrogers15
    Nov 17, 2011
    2
    This game has bad graphics compaired to other games first of all, second is the voice actors are horrible, third is the story is crap, the game looks dated, the only play is very laggy and sluggish for no reason, and it also freezes sometimes. Total waste of money.
  57. Towelie_123
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    Same **** different day. I remember playing modern warfare for the first time in 2007 and being instantly hooked. 4 years on and all I am left with is a feeling of major disappointment and wanting a whole lot more from the series. Sure there is some awe inspiring visuals in this game but the whole process from start to finish is completely scripted where even though your in the game youSame **** different day. I remember playing modern warfare for the first time in 2007 and being instantly hooked. 4 years on and all I am left with is a feeling of major disappointment and wanting a whole lot more from the series. Sure there is some awe inspiring visuals in this game but the whole process from start to finish is completely scripted where even though your in the game you never feel like your doing anything, kinda like sitting in the passenger seat of your car while someone else drives it. This game is like some major deja vu mind **** to any one that's already played mw1/mw2. Mission by mission is just a replay of the original mw and although it was great then with a new game you expect something new or it quickly becomes tedious as is the case with mw3. In short i feel the developers of this game took the original layout of the game made a few slight changes and then relied on mw reputation to sell this game rather then risking doing anything innovate or ground breaking. I wont get started on the multi-player or the elite superscription as that is a bigger let down then the campaign I just really, really hope they pull something out of the bag for mw4 or just don't bother at all.… Expand
  58. TheHaus25
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    Not what I was looking for. I found this to be the most dumbed down COD experience yet. The changes made to the perk and killstreak systems are cool at first but after the paint wears off, you realize it's the same old car underneath. Multiplayer just doesn't feel right and doesn't run as smooth at MW2.

    I guess what can you expect with the core staff of IW leaving. They played it too    Not what I was looking for. I found this to be the most dumbed down COD experience yet. The changes made to the perk and killstreak systems are cool at first but after the paint wears off, you realize it's the same old car underneath. Multiplayer just doesn't feel right and doesn't run as smooth at MW2.

    I guess what can you expect with the core staff of IW leaving. They played it too safe this time and yes the casuals and mindless who just buy this game every year because they see a commercial on sunday will buy it, but the people realize what's going on are waking up.    … Expand
  59. mikeintosh
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    It is difficult to recommend this game if you own virtually any recent version of the CoD series. Game play and graphics quality is virtually unchanged. The single player campaign is somewhat better than previous versions, it is not the greatest FPS story or campaign.

    The new survival mode is interesting but directly comparable to zombies on CoD Black Ops. Otherwise online play is    It is difficult to recommend this game if you own virtually any recent version of the CoD series. Game play and graphics quality is virtually unchanged. The single player campaign is somewhat better than previous versions, it is not the greatest FPS story or campaign.

    The new survival mode is interesting but directly comparable to zombies on CoD Black Ops. Otherwise online play is largely unchanged except for the maps.    … Expand
  60. z1p
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    Whatever you do, DO NOT BUY THIS GAME! It is a slightly adjusted version of the previous title, MW2. The challenges for multiplayer are EXACTLY the same as MW1! Story is okay, I say just give this one a rental. Not worth your money or time. Buy BF3 if you want a good shooter.
  61. BREVITY
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    Have been a big fan in the past; going to the midnight launch & taking a day off to play. As a real fan I believe this game really misses the mark. Activision and IW lost a lot of their credibility and trust from me. I have so many complaints but my biggest is that after purchasing my sons hardened edition and putting in his Elite code on xbox.com he gets an account not eligible toHave been a big fan in the past; going to the midnight launch & taking a day off to play. As a real fan I believe this game really misses the mark. Activision and IW lost a lot of their credibility and trust from me. I have so many complaints but my biggest is that after purchasing my sons hardened edition and putting in his Elite code on xbox.com he gets an account not eligible to register message on his Xbox when trying to use the Elite app. If there was going to be an age restriction why not reject the code so that we could then sell it or something. I am so pissed. We were beta testers for Elite and I never seen anything that couldnt be viewed by him. He and I already have an account created online under our profiles and that works but he doesnt get any of the benefits in game or access to the app and as a parent I am not being allowed to grant that permission. They have wasted my 50$ and seem to have no intent on fixing this. My other complaints center around the service not working for me. The maps are not great and not even as good as BLOPS, or MW2. Graphics are on par with MW2 which came out years ago. They just didnt seem to try on this one.… Expand
  62. wolfman7173
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    OK, So Modern Warfare 3 comes out to much anticipation. Millions of people pre-order and buy this game in the first few days of release. This game is now the most grossing game of all time. And what did you get for your time and money. Well for most of us we got what we expected. The game is VERY similar to previous renditions. The game is so similar that many of who love the seriesOK, So Modern Warfare 3 comes out to much anticipation. Millions of people pre-order and buy this game in the first few days of release. This game is now the most grossing game of all time. And what did you get for your time and money. Well for most of us we got what we expected. The game is VERY similar to previous renditions. The game is so similar that many of who love the series are very disappointed in the fact so much has improved over the previous releases. You can go into much debate over the positive and negative of each title released. However, much to be said is that there was always things that improved. I would say that COD4 was a breakthrough and even MW2 was revolutionary in many ways. Black Ops brought us the "Currency System" of buying your perks and weapons and for some that was huge and a great add-on. But mainly you saw improvements that have become staples. Examples:
    COD4 - First "Modern" war shooter for the series and really moved the genre forward to that. Think of it this way, how many WWII shooters exist these days. World at War - Introduced us to Zombies and who would have though they would be so addicting. Modern Warfare 2 - Brought us back to the Modern shooter and added some much needed improvements to the game play (Except for Quick Scoping - which is short for "I cant aim")
    Black Ops - This brought us the Wager Matches and who would have thought playing games like Gun Game, Sharpshooter, One in the Chamber and Sticks and Stones would be so much fun. They also started the ability to Split Screen online. This was huge for those with families and multiple people wanting play at the same time.
    Modern Warfare 3 - Kill Confirmed and Team Defend which are nice and have their positives. I think everyone like the campers being gone in Kill Confirmed and Team Defend has its positives when playing with friends. So what else did MW3 bring us. "Survival Mode" - No wait, that is Zombies in the modern war style. "Wager Matches" - No, these came from Black Ops. "Split Screen" - No that was from Black Ops too. "Modern Shooter" - No, this is from several renditions now. So really all we got was two new game modes. Taking the same weapons and adding a few new ones with a little shuffling of the perks does not make a game. It makes an Expansion. Let's look at Multiplayer and see what we have. First of all the Balancing of Weapons is way out of wack. You should not be able to snipe someone from across the map with a LMG in 3-5 shots. That is not possible. You should not have people aiming down the sights and turning a corner and getting a head shot when you were barely spawned and they have no radar or UAV up. Can you say "Aimbot" and cheating? To see MW2 aimbots working with MW3 on release day says they didn't even think to fix them. I can't believe the developers don't surf the websites and download all of the aimbots and think to patch them so they don't work. The maps are the same scene over and over again. A city scene, a bazaar, a city scene, a warehouse, a city scene with a downed helicopter. Really? In the previous releases we have been to the jungle, a ship deck, warehouses, cities, container yards, training setups with plywood, etc. Lets have some imagination again. With the weapons so over powered, the cheats in use so early, bad map designs and bad spawn locations you get very frustrated with the game. I know, so you are doing good in the game and disagree. Well I am a better then average player. I maintain a typical 1.2 Kill/Death ratio in most releases and so far in Modern Warfare 3 I have a .5 K/D. I think there is something wrong in that. The real crazy thing is I have about a dozen friends (Online and in real life) that are similar players or much better and none of them have a K/D over .7 and are complaining about the same things. Some of them have K/D ratios above 3.0. Then take the leader boards for Accuracy in MW3, and explain to me how the first 250+ people have a 100% accuracy. How is that possible? There is nobody that good and they should all be checked for cheating. Since Elite records all games it should be easy to watch the game and see they cheated. Really 30-0 in a TDM game. Is that possible without a hack? Most will say it is not.

    Now you have the developers going on Twitter and asking "Fans" to come to Metacritic and "Boost" the user score. Really? If your product is good you will get a good score. Even if it starts out negative, as those who play it see its good they will balance out the score on their own. But if you have to ask your fan base to boost the score, you know you did something wrong. In my humble opinion, Activision screwed up in letting the two original IW developers go and they got a second rate person to handle the MW3 development team and such they got a second rate product. For me the release was something I looked forward too.    … Expand
  63. Grantus921
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    Wish I didn't have to pay 60 bucks for this game. It's the same game, which isn't bad, but I don't feel like I got my money's worth. Fun to play along side with your friends online, but then it doesn't look as smooth anymore.
  64. bribrijr5
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    Huge COD fan since 1. This game is nothing but an expansion pack. They are milking the series to no end and is not worth the price tag it comes with. The series has gone downhill since World at War.
  65. GurnB
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    This release would have been better served as DLC content. The IW/Treyarch engine is getting fairly long in the tooth. The series, like several others, should take a year off once in a while and not feel obligated to release a rehash just for the purpose of cashing in.
  66. grumpychicken
    Nov 15, 2011
    2
    This game doesn't change anything from the past 4 Call of Duty games. All it does is have a slightly new story in campaign and make one or two new multiplayer modes along with a new set of maps. Overall almost same game as MW2, same graphics engine even.
  67. WongBater
    Nov 16, 2011
    2
    Metacritic has rejuvenated my faith in the online game review by allowing the community to rate games instead of a possibly paid off individual. On my way to purchase Skyrim I notice a fairly young child running to the MW3 shelf. This not only shows the audience this game is designed to appeal to, but also how sole "gamer" reviews are almost entirely useless in representing a product. TheyMetacritic has rejuvenated my faith in the online game review by allowing the community to rate games instead of a possibly paid off individual. On my way to purchase Skyrim I notice a fairly young child running to the MW3 shelf. This not only shows the audience this game is designed to appeal to, but also how sole "gamer" reviews are almost entirely useless in representing a product. They will berate lesser known titles for lacking innovation or copying mechanics, but when Activision sends out a re-skinned MW its "THE BEST MODERN WARFARE YET". I am not saying however that the original MW was bad, it just upsets me when companies can continue to make the same damn game and charge full price along with overpriced DLCs and Elite packages. Even after playing survival (zombie ripoff) mode it continues failing to impress.… Expand
  68. Drunkeneric
    Nov 16, 2011
    2
    Horrible. No innovation at all. This is basically Modern Warfare 2.25. This old have been put into a $15 map pack. The changes to the killsteaks are silly, and the graphics look like Cod4. Maps are nothing special, and games get old fast when you keep spawning 5 feet from the enemy. I can't believe all the aspects of this game that are the SAME. I am sure they are laughing all the theHorrible. No innovation at all. This is basically Modern Warfare 2.25. This old have been put into a $15 map pack. The changes to the killsteaks are silly, and the graphics look like Cod4. Maps are nothing special, and games get old fast when you keep spawning 5 feet from the enemy. I can't believe all the aspects of this game that are the SAME. I am sure they are laughing all the the way to the bank, and are having a party in Vegas right now.I wish I could get back the $100 I wasted on this.....which includes the $50 Elite that still doesnt even work!… Expand
  69. JamboSlice
    Nov 16, 2011
    2
    I own every cod title and go back to them every now and then, i think this will be the first time a cod title will sit on my shelf to gather dust, the only reason im giving it 2 is due to the story.

    The lag is worse than black ops by a large margin, putting 20+ bullets into someone with a lmg and rapid fire only to instantly die the second he opens fire is extremely frustrating especially    I own every cod title and go back to them every now and then, i think this will be the first time a cod title will sit on my shelf to gather dust, the only reason im giving it 2 is due to the story.

    The lag is worse than black ops by a large margin, putting 20+ bullets into someone with a lmg and rapid fire only to instantly die the second he opens fire is extremely frustrating especially when on the kill cam you dont let off a single round.

    Theres also nothing new or groundbreaking in mp killstreaks are still killstreaks no matter how you twist it, same goes for leveling weapons, they might aswell have kept the cash system from black ops.

    This will be the last cod game i buy from infinity ward without playing first.

    Ps. Dont get me started on map design and all the recycling.    … Expand
  70. thek826
    Nov 16, 2011
    2
    Developers begging for help with community ratings, people raging on forums, Youtube, and gaming sites such as this one. All of this was very foreseeable and has simply made me happy that I got this game for free from a friend who can't play it anymore after his PS3 broke (little sister poured milk on it :P).

    The main problem with Call of Duty is the constant use of the same exact    Developers begging for help with community ratings, people raging on forums, Youtube, and gaming sites such as this one. All of this was very foreseeable and has simply made me happy that I got this game for free from a friend who can't play it anymore after his PS3 broke (little sister poured milk on it :P).

    The main problem with Call of Duty is the constant use of the same exact gameplay with close to no changes in each sequel. Now, you might be saying, "Well if Call of Duty made a huge innovation many people wouldn't be happy!" and you would be right. However, there is a solution to this. Stop. Making. New. CODS. The series is already on its eight title, and has failed to make large changes since the fourth one. Even worse, the only good change since the first one is the graphics. The major change in call of duty 4 was the addition of class customization. However, it's safe to say this wasn't a good change. I'm not saying that Russians shouldn't be using M4A1s, and that Americans shouldn't use an AK-47, like how it is in Battlefield 3. Call of Duty isn't meant to be realistic. If it was realistic, no one should be running around with a 30 pound sniper rifle faster than with a 10 pound light machine gun. However, the problem with all of this customization is that due to the serious lack of limits, players are free to exploit a single imbalance with the correct customization kits, forcing everyone to use the exact same class if they want to play a fair game. In battlefield 3, with the exception of a certain scope (which is being fixed soon anyway), the limitations on our customizations balance the game quite a bit.    … Expand
  71. ThePunisher
    Nov 17, 2011
    2
    Gamers main objective in moving to new game is always better experience, its not only in weapons or in graphics but also goes into the tactics, environment control, machines, etc.. MWF3 lacks for all that upgrade, if its anything, its just a very expensive patch or upgrade to MWF2.

    The only and great advantage of this game is mainly the server connection, so far its awesome comparing to    Gamers main objective in moving to new game is always better experience, its not only in weapons or in graphics but also goes into the tactics, environment control, machines, etc.. MWF3 lacks for all that upgrade, if its anything, its just a very expensive patch or upgrade to MWF2.

    The only and great advantage of this game is mainly the server connection, so far its awesome comparing to CoD4, MWF2 & definitely its better than the crappy BlackOps servers, who lags & crash more than they work.

    I know that the developers will be saying "its only an adaptation phase and everyone will like the game later on" i agree with them, we will adapt as we already a loyal clients for your games, however you should ask yourself do you want to end up like Batterfield ? if yes then say that and you will become another BF extension...    … Expand
  72. Numureon
    Nov 17, 2011
    2
    Just sad to see this game disappoint as much as it did. The greedy practice of re-hashing the same game every year has really culminated in this abomination of a Call of Duty game. It's fun, but nothing new. And the entire time I was playing it I just felt like I was going through the same motions I was going through four years ago in Modern Warfare. The story just felt like a ridiculousJust sad to see this game disappoint as much as it did. The greedy practice of re-hashing the same game every year has really culminated in this abomination of a Call of Duty game. It's fun, but nothing new. And the entire time I was playing it I just felt like I was going through the same motions I was going through four years ago in Modern Warfare. The story just felt like a ridiculous Michael Bay movie, storming castles, diamond mines, and hotels, all while controlling helicopters with iPads. But the story alone wasn't anywhere near as disappointing as the multiplayer. Or maybe it was just a map pack. I'm really not sure anymore. If it is just a map pack, it sure was a bad one. There may have been two or three maps I really enjoyed, but with such a low ratio it's hard to play through the usual rotation of bad maps. Frankly, I'm upset at Activision. And now with Sledgehammer practically begging for positive reviews, I think it will be a long time before I give them my money again. My copy of MW3 is back where it belongs, returned to the store.… Expand
  73. nicster147
    Nov 17, 2011
    2
    Call of duty. It's good, it'f fun, it's the same as it was in the original MW. While it's fun and good to play there is almost nothing really new here. If you've played any other call of duty, then you've played this. If you haven't then this is a great game.
  74. BravoDelta
    Nov 18, 2011
    2
    A lazy game. A rehash of MW2 which clearly uses some of the same map features in MP. They seem to have reverted the MP to MW1 and left out the better bits of Black Ops. A poor implementation. This may as well have been a map pack. Looks like IW have ran out of ideas now. The maps are terrible. The voice comms are scrambled, the local search option has been removed, the dive to prone optionA lazy game. A rehash of MW2 which clearly uses some of the same map features in MP. They seem to have reverted the MP to MW1 and left out the better bits of Black Ops. A poor implementation. This may as well have been a map pack. Looks like IW have ran out of ideas now. The maps are terrible. The voice comms are scrambled, the local search option has been removed, the dive to prone option has been removed, and the mechanics of the game mean that the host advantage is significant making for some very frustrating games. Seems to have all the same glitches as MW2 at launch. People putting button images in clan tags, glitches to get under the maps, being able to use sniper rifles like one shot kill assualt rifles due to being able to 'quick scope'. These things should never make it out of testing. The couple of new game types in MP are good though, kill confirmed and team defender.
    As for the single player again this is poor. It's basically 80% cut scene. Just because you can control the player doesn't make it any less of a cut scene. Even played through on Veteran it's a breeze.
    The only redeeming feature seems to be survival mode. It's basically the MW3 version of Zombies. This would have benefited from allowing more than 2 players though.
    This is also the first title to integrate with Elite. That has been a complete disaster and over a week after launch it's still not working properly. How they expect people to actually pay money is beyond me. The fact that people are paying says a lot about the power of the COD franchise.
    Overall a poor and lazy effort. Absolutely no new ideas here, a rehash of MW2 with worse maps.    … Expand
  75. gmd0637
    Nov 18, 2011
    2
    Forgot to rate it when I originally posted my review. I didn't intend to rate the game a 10. Sorry if that caused any confusion. I will still be playing this game, but I won't have any false hope that the cons I mentioned in my previous review will become better.
  76. yamon56
    Nov 18, 2011
    2
    MWF2 in a "new and improved" package. Give me a break. I didn't buy the game for the multiplayer as I prefer team based gaming you get from Battlefield. If you're going to cry about how large the maps are and how you can't get 20 kills in 5 seconds, then we don't want your lame ass playing anyway. I bought Black Ops and never finished it. Prolly won't finish MWF3 campaign either.MWF2 in a "new and improved" package. Give me a break. I didn't buy the game for the multiplayer as I prefer team based gaming you get from Battlefield. If you're going to cry about how large the maps are and how you can't get 20 kills in 5 seconds, then we don't want your lame ass playing anyway. I bought Black Ops and never finished it. Prolly won't finish MWF3 campaign either. MWF3..meh. I have more fun playing with my inflatable sheep.… Expand
  77. niallthegod
    Nov 18, 2011
    2
    the same sh*t all over again !!! and i cant believe we as gamers accept this :S the only positive is the horde type mode which is ok but really should be 4 player + . other than that this game would be o/10 but with horde i gets 2/10 in my books DO NOT BUY!!!
  78. Albie9000
    Nov 18, 2011
    2
    Same old game. Its sad that they made another bajillion dollars on what essentially is an expansion pack. The story plays ilke a best of Michael Bay movie. The multiplayer is the biggest disappointment... Absolutely nothing new. Spawning system is garbage as you spawn into enemy fire. CoD is on its way to destroying the FPS.
  79. clphenomenon
    Nov 18, 2011
    2
    I specifically created a metacritic account just so I could let other people know the dissapointment that is modern warfare 3. First off I think it is incredibly tacky and absurb that someone from their company had the nerve to beg people to give it better reviews on metacritic, there is a reason your game is getting so many bad reviews, its a horrible game. The campaign was interestingI specifically created a metacritic account just so I could let other people know the dissapointment that is modern warfare 3. First off I think it is incredibly tacky and absurb that someone from their company had the nerve to beg people to give it better reviews on metacritic, there is a reason your game is getting so many bad reviews, its a horrible game. The campaign was interesting and entertaining, but I beat it on hard and found all the intel within 12 hours. Spec ops is actually the best part of the game. Again, all the missions I have beaten withing 12 hours and now I am working on the survival mode. There is a decent amount of replay value at the survival, but in no way will you be able to play as long as a zombies match, and personally i find zombies to be more entertaining. This leads me to the multiplayer, wnich is the reason I bought the game, and where I expect to get my value for the game. I cannot stand to play the multiplayer. They have taken steps back from mw2 and black ops. Every map is extremely similar. Quick scoping is back, 2-3 bullets gets a kill with any gun. The assault killstreaks barely can get kills since everything is indoors. And the support killstreak has a stealth bomber which is overpowered and will end anyone who is using the assault packages streak. Its not enjoyable, I bought the hardened thinking i was going to log countless hours, and after less than 20 i cant stand to even play more than 1 game. Save your money. They tricked me but hopefully someone else will save themselves from buying a terrible game.… Expand
  80. Solano
    Nov 19, 2011
    2
    Same thing*, different day. It´s been the same formula for what, seven sequels? Playing Call of Duty it´s like being in Truman Show - you are a mere spectator in a big budget Michael Bay show, always following someone who´s telling you what to do. The Call of Duty series is creating a whole generation of dumb players. What a shame.
  81. Mixpix
    Nov 20, 2011
    2
    Honestly, this game is garbage. Small maps, same gun models / sounds as in previous CoD, Constant action.. This game feels and looks like an arcade game you get from XBL. This game IS SO OVER HYPED, the reviews it's getting should be divided in half to get the real thing. I can guarantee IW hasn't done anything new in MW3 and it shows. The multiplayer is just chaotic **** I actually findHonestly, this game is garbage. Small maps, same gun models / sounds as in previous CoD, Constant action.. This game feels and looks like an arcade game you get from XBL. This game IS SO OVER HYPED, the reviews it's getting should be divided in half to get the real thing. I can guarantee IW hasn't done anything new in MW3 and it shows. The multiplayer is just chaotic **** I actually find it even worse than MW2 or even black ops which was just above the par for me. And for that sledgehammer title who whined about these user reviews: Your game is rushed, copypasted piece of **** and BF3 has definetly slammed you out of the park. And I say that as a previous CoD player.… Expand
  82. alpacahat
    Nov 20, 2011
    2
    I had high hopes for this game and was disappointed to find that IW took all the elements from mw2 and great elements from blops and repackaged it into mw3. Highlights to the game's mp include pointstreaks which are support-style kill-streaks that don't reset once you die and some new guns. IW was resting on their laurels when they made this one. On the other hand, Treyarch tried soI had high hopes for this game and was disappointed to find that IW took all the elements from mw2 and great elements from blops and repackaged it into mw3. Highlights to the game's mp include pointstreaks which are support-style kill-streaks that don't reset once you die and some new guns. IW was resting on their laurels when they made this one. On the other hand, Treyarch tried so hard to bring new elements to the table â… Expand
  83. OldZ_Skool
    Nov 20, 2011
    2
    I found this game to be a copy of MW2 with nothing very unique. Developers showed a lack luster effort to try something different in the series. Wish I would not have bought and just kept playing MW2 with map expansion.
  84. adamrains
    Nov 20, 2011
    2
    Given the enormous teaser trailers released via the internet and Xbox Live, I had expected that MW3 would have a huge focus on an epic global campaign mode. I didn't expect much out of the multiplayer feature of the game. Once a franchise like this hits it's stride, you can only reinvent the wheel so many times. However, the product I ended up taking home for $60, after playing through,Given the enormous teaser trailers released via the internet and Xbox Live, I had expected that MW3 would have a huge focus on an epic global campaign mode. I didn't expect much out of the multiplayer feature of the game. Once a franchise like this hits it's stride, you can only reinvent the wheel so many times. However, the product I ended up taking home for $60, after playing through, felt like more of an insult than a gaming experience. First off, the campaign mode was ridiculously short, given the expectations laid down by Infinity Ward's marketing team. I was looking forward to a crazy World War III scenario. At the very least, I was hoping that the team would make it to Moscow. Instead, what I got was a bunch of short-ish and uninteresting Delta Force situations that took me less than 4 hours to shoot my way through. To frame it in a different context...I felt like MW 2 was one of the best first person shooters ever made, in addition to having a great anti-war message. MW 3 just felt like a game hellbent on cruise control. Instead of having a bunch of Special Ops missions, I would much rather have seen more effort and time put into the Campaign mode. I don't care about a bunch of little missions (whose difficulty is through the roof, I suppose, to give you the illusion of more game hours,) and while I thought the Survival mode was a nice touch, I would've gladly given it up for the same reasons. The developing team really screwed the pooch here, attempting to be a jack of all trades and a master of none. Of course, Infinity Ward probably knew at this point that all they needed to do is make Multiplayer good and people wouldn't complain. So that's what they put more focus on than anything...but by "focus", I only mean "a few new features and a handful of features ripped from Call of Duty: Black Ops." But they did launch the Elite app, which allows them to take your money a little early for content that nobody cares about. My guess is that they knew that they didn't have to work as hard to make a quality game, since this one wraps up the story of the last two, and people would buy it anyway in anticipation. As far as game mechanics for Multiplayer go...more of the same. I think I actually preferred the currency system of Black Ops, so I don't have to grind to level up weapons. I'd rather earn XP and buy them. As a casual gamer, I have no desire to spend 8 to 16 hours on Xbox Live so that I can have a hybrid sight for my AK 47. (I will say that the hybrid sight was a cool new addition, but one among very few.) The divide and conquer approach to the Perks / Weapon Leveling system was unnecessary and stupid. I would've been happy with it being fine the way it was. In closing, I'm sure a lot of time, money, and hard work went into developing this game. I'm sure that hours were tirelessly spent by Infinity Ward's development team trying to figure out how to squeeze fresh blood from an already dried up and overused turnip. Either that, or they wasted a bunch of time on two useless game modes while neglecting the Campaign mode, switching a few features around on Multiplayer, and pouring millions of dollars into promoting a game with a lackluster plot, redundant features to the last two games, and no passion whatsoever.… Expand
  85. Netmaster
    Nov 20, 2011
    2
    Well to be honest, the game itself provides the entertainment that hardcore Call of Duty fans look for in their First Person Shooters. The fast paced action and entertainment is present throughout the game. However, this critically acclaimed game lacks any ingenuity. The single player campaign is the only difference between this installment of the Modern Warfare series and itsWell to be honest, the game itself provides the entertainment that hardcore Call of Duty fans look for in their First Person Shooters. The fast paced action and entertainment is present throughout the game. However, this critically acclaimed game lacks any ingenuity. The single player campaign is the only difference between this installment of the Modern Warfare series and its predecessors. At most, this game could be an expansion map pack or some other form of Downloadable Content. Only a few new guns and no new gameplay styles have been introduced, thus providing a subpar sequel to the series.… Expand
  86. justinsane4
    Nov 21, 2011
    2
    It continually gets worse and worse, and Modern Warfare 3 is no exception. It is by far the worst installment in the entire Call of Duty franchise, even more disappointing than Black Ops. There's really not even a reason to go into detail about it. Nearly every aspect has taken a dive compared to Black Ops and Modern Warfare 2. It's more of the same, and even less impressive.
  87. W4YN3
    Nov 21, 2011
    2
    The only good thing about this game is its campaign and even that has pointless scenes in it that have no purpose in the plot of the campaign as a whole, the multiplayer is just a copy over from MW2 but everytings been made a lot shinier. they knew they couldnt release another Game without adding something a little different so they added Team defender and Kill confirmed which for a twoThe only good thing about this game is its campaign and even that has pointless scenes in it that have no purpose in the plot of the campaign as a whole, the multiplayer is just a copy over from MW2 but everytings been made a lot shinier. they knew they couldnt release another Game without adding something a little different so they added Team defender and Kill confirmed which for a two year development cycle goes to show how much they know this game will sell no matter what they do. In 2 years we have a mid length campaign and 2 new games modes which dont require very much skill in thinking up, this game has just gone down hill from MW, greed has killed the franchise. but is you like the Modern warfare campaign then be sure to pick the game up it still is a decent campaign but is it really worth £45 i dont think so.… Expand
  88. BigRedHusker
    Nov 21, 2011
    2
    Ok as a fan of the COD series, favorites being COD2, MW, Black Ops. I am not a fan boy, meaning I want the series to do well and continue to improve but I will not defend it and give it a perfect score just because I have to try and justify my purchase, or feel that I must defend it because I feel im being attacked by hatersor because it's apparently cool to hate on the cod series butOk as a fan of the COD series, favorites being COD2, MW, Black Ops. I am not a fan boy, meaning I want the series to do well and continue to improve but I will not defend it and give it a perfect score just because I have to try and justify my purchase, or feel that I must defend it because I feel im being attacked by hatersor because it's apparently cool to hate on the cod series but the whiners keep purchasing it. So here goes my honest review of MW3. It's terrible, save your money, your not missing anything that you have not played before. literally exact same thing as previous games but somehow far worse

    Graphics - 4 out of 10 Who cares about looking at graphics if your not having fun. which neither the campaign or multiplayer is. however taking the time to look around they are nothing spectacular and in someways worse than previous cod titles definatly far behind other games that are currently out now

    Audio - 2 of 10. this being played on a 750 watt 5.1 surround system using digital optical out. I hate throwing this out there because I don't care for the battlefield series but audio quality compared to just other games is bad. Compared to what is perhaps the best audio of any game in history / battlefield 3 and even bad company 2. MW3's audio may as well be 8 bit NES stereo sounds.

    campaign gameplay -2 out of 10 was there a campaign? 4 hours and its over. most of it completely lackluster and other parts so over the top it makes it lackluster. it only gets a 2 because IW was brave enough to kill off a character

    And Finally for the meat and potatoes of all COD titles the multiplayer. 0 of 10. You've played other cod titles you've played this one. what makes it so bad though is it's complete lack of innovation and the completely unoriginal, boring clusterfks of what they call maps. Previous COD titles and im only referring to COD2 and MW had great multiplayer maps that became fan favorites. This stopped once IW started to copy treyarchs idea of no spot is safe map ideas. I love sniping in cod games or at least I did until everyone started to believe that quick scopping is fun and a legitimate tactic. which is pretty much what started the downfall of the cod series at least for me. I cant remember the names of the cod 2 maps. but they had awesome sniping maps where you could battle other snipers across the maps. from 3 story buildings and farmhouse silos with only 1 access to those sniping spots. and MW's overgrown and a few other maps that were great for sniping.

    Then treyarch came along and started making these maps that sure may have had a upperstory window but with such a narrow viewpoint or a tree sticking in the way that it made them terrible spots. combined with throwing random objects in the way. but that's just for sniping.

    perks are rehashed and even some of the fan favorites are gone. added with over the top, to many to count killstreaks and what is now the BS support package where you streaks don't reset upon death and everyone just guns for juggernaugh or osprey. this series has become stale and utterly rediculous so much so it's unplayable. for fans who have wanted a great cod since MW. sorry to say you will be stuck with MW. and blackops is still a great 2nd choice even though they are maps made by treyarch.    … Expand
  89. noahsimo
    Nov 24, 2011
    2
    More like Modern Warfare 0.5. I have waited this long to write a review to give myself time to make the minor adjustments necessary for all the games in the cod series. My initial impressions were that MW3 is terrible, and sadly it is still my opinion. Infinity Ward made promises to 'fix' the problems with MW2, and make it more like cod4, meaning less overpowered kill streaks, fasterMore like Modern Warfare 0.5. I have waited this long to write a review to give myself time to make the minor adjustments necessary for all the games in the cod series. My initial impressions were that MW3 is terrible, and sadly it is still my opinion. Infinity Ward made promises to 'fix' the problems with MW2, and make it more like cod4, meaning less overpowered kill streaks, faster pace, and more focus on gun-on-gun battles. They failed in every single aspect in what they promised. MW3 rewards bad players who aren't able to string together kills and rewards them for playing slow paced. It also punishes people for trying to play fast paced and aggressive. First of all, the maps are terrible. There are so many different paths leading to the same location it makes it very easy for people to flank you. Creating less gun-on-gun battles and very slow paced gameplay because people just sneaking around corners. This favors inexperienced players because people who have no idea what they're doing are able to accidentally sneak up behind people and shoot them in the back. Next, the support strike package is absolutely idiotic. It is a system that rewards bad players who are not able to get multiple kills in a row. Also, it is a support class, not an assault class. There should be absolutely no lethal kill streaks in the support package. Period. However, the biggest problem of all is the perk assassin. This is most overpowered perk in the history of call of duty. People complained of ghost from black ops being overpowered. How did Infinity Ward respond to that complaint? Doing the exact freaking opposite. They made it even more powerful. Being immune to counter UAV, EMP, and advanced UAV! What were they thinking!? There is no counter to it. This perk is what is most responsible for the slow paced, boring, camping behavior that is oh so prevalent online. I found myself almost forced to use it at times because of the excessive amount of enemy UAV's people are able to get because of the support strike package. People may counter this by saying that you are able to shoot the UAV's down. This is true. However, another stupid move by infinity Ward was to make the UAV's extremely hard to see. And on most maps, there are so many buildings you can't shoot down anything. Lastly, the matchmaking system took a step backward. There is no locale only search option. I'm tired of being put in games where I get killed without even seeing who shot me. Then i look at the killcam and from their point of view they were right in front of me! Bottom line: MW3 is a huge disappointment. They took one step forward and 10 steps backward.… Expand
  90. ceekay7
    Nov 21, 2011
    2
    The multiplayer was really poor and disappointing. With what the technology out there today i expected alot better graphics and a better character enhancements. Playing the game it feels rushed it felt this was more about making money rather then making a great game. The layouts are so retro and horrible to look at, with black ops you could create how you want your emblem or title it wasThe multiplayer was really poor and disappointing. With what the technology out there today i expected alot better graphics and a better character enhancements. Playing the game it feels rushed it felt this was more about making money rather then making a great game. The layouts are so retro and horrible to look at, with black ops you could create how you want your emblem or title it was down to your imagination what you created. The elite service aint even working yet with on week 3 of release still cant access a service we paid extra for. MW3 has got more campers then before more nubetubbers and more overpowered guns which spoils the experience. The guns themselves are so big and chunky i feel is this really necessary just to kill someone. Luckily for myself there has been other big titles released so i have put mw3 down and not had that desire to play it anymore. Role on next years release… Expand
  91. phatman1211
    Nov 21, 2011
    2
    what to say about this game.....plenty. Graphics: i read an article by Glenn Schofield in which he defended that the graphics had changed. thats a load of bull****. There is absoultely no big difference in the graphics, the sound effects have been recycled and you can hear the SAME sound effects on multiple guns (i.e. M4A1, M16, and ACR reloading sounds.) They clearly ran out of ideas forwhat to say about this game.....plenty. Graphics: i read an article by Glenn Schofield in which he defended that the graphics had changed. thats a load of bull****. There is absoultely no big difference in the graphics, the sound effects have been recycled and you can hear the SAME sound effects on multiple guns (i.e. M4A1, M16, and ACR reloading sounds.) They clearly ran out of ideas for improving animations as the new sprinting movements look ridiculous and quickly implemented as a way to cover up this copy and paste of a game. Campaign: The campaign is even shorter than mw2 with even more unrealistic plot and action sequences. It is cheesy, predictable and the plot pacing is even worse than mw2's. Spec Ops: There are EVEN LESS spec op missions than before, sure they added Survival mode, but wait. thats just Zombies with guns! the missions are longer yes, but that also backfires when going back multiple times to beat a level. They are uncreative and mostly similar.
    Multiplayer: Oh look, its the same gamemodes as cod4 AGAIN. there is absoultely NO innovation whatsoever. every map has been balanced out yes, but this makes them all pretty similar and boring layouts. Most guns from Mw2 are back with the MP5 and G36C from cod4. Kill confirmed is just team deathmatch, team defender is capture the flag with headquarters inspiration. Every gamemode is still the same. the perks are uncreative and its clear that they ran out of ideas and just broke down old gameplay elements and turned them into perks. Although the Prestige Shop is a nice addition, there isnt much to use and double xp is a waste. Theatre mode makes a comeback, but for some reason the game begins lagging horribly when its turned on, black ops did not have that problem. This game is mw2 with different maps, less spec ops, campaign and innovation. if anything this game takes steps back and should be called mw1.9.

    Overall: 2/10

    Pros: Balancing, more maps, finishes the storyline

    Cons: Same s**t we've seen for the last 4 years, same graphics, short campaign, less spec ops missions, no creative gamemodes, no creative perks, recycled animations and sound effects, 8-13 year olds will rule the online community. (isnt this game rated M for MATURE?!?!??!?!!)    … Expand
  92. Bavo
    Nov 21, 2011
    2
    The fact is MW3 is a playable game that uses and established storyline and graphics engine. I admit that they had some nice set pieces of New York in the beginning and that the multiplayer is what you expect and that it is the same as MW2.
    That's my problem, when I sat and put the game in my console I couldn't wait, but the first thing is the menu is for all purposes the same as MW2 just a    The fact is MW3 is a playable game that uses and established storyline and graphics engine. I admit that they had some nice set pieces of New York in the beginning and that the multiplayer is what you expect and that it is the same as MW2.
    That's my problem, when I sat and put the game in my console I couldn't wait, but the first thing is the menu is for all purposes the same as MW2 just a different colour, looking back I am surprised it wasn't just a slightly darker yellow, but I guess there was enough innovation to change the colour and that is practically it. I sat and played and when finished, I only remembered that I had completed the single player campaign for MW3 because the box was on my coffee table in front of me. To me the game felt like I had just played MW2 again with bits of MW in it. I played about 5 of the co op missions and lost interest quickly again I could have been playing MW2, the survival mode, interested me, perhaps myself and 3 of my mates can fight it out against wave after wave of bots, erm no. Then to the multiplayer and this was the biggest disappointment, the series has been based off its multiplayer experience, and as blacks ops showed the world when more rounds had been fired than stars in our galaxy, not a bad indicator of a game, because someone must of played it, I certainly did. Yet the multiplayer is the same as MW2, with a few extra gimmicks, instead of kill streaks just on their own you can have assault (Kill streak) support packages where you keep your kills wicked but you are still punished as you can never really use anything cool to annihilate your foe. A few different game modes like kill confirmed, yeah fantastic, adds a new element for all of an hour but then it just becomes the same repetitive game play, hang on am I playing MW2 or MW3? Hang on let me check the DVD case. Yep it says MW3 but I'm not convinced.
    Many have slammed this game, fair enough its each to their own opinion. I have given it a 2 because like many I was severely disappointed. The COD series since the beginning on PC led the innovation in gaming and with Modern Warfare they broke boundaries like never before, and then MW2 did the same, though black ops was pretty much the same, i loved combat training, my mates and I would play free for all for hours on end with torrents of abuse following every kill or death. Though, MW3 well that's it, there is no real innovation, the graphics engine is tried and test great but used and it shows, the multiplayer is the same as MW2 and offers nothing really new and exciting. I truly have played this game for 9 hours including completing the single player campaign and that's it, it has never graced my console and most likely never will. It is a formula that works and is sound buts is a near on copy with nothing to make me go wow. and that's the disappointment for me. Many would hope with the release of XGD3 for the 360 that extra 1gig of space could have more, but it doesn't. Finally, sorry if you have fallen into a coma by now, I find it immensely funny that Glen Schofield of Sledgehammer games responded to the mass of negative reviews trying to boost the user rating of the game, but really what threat is the rating on here the critics have nearly all praised the game, to review the game properly and not troll etc, you need to have played the game, which means you bought it or hired it, so why does he care, the score isn't going to change the amount of money that has been made. What I do hope is that maybe some one in the development team will look at this and realise that innovation is what keeps you at the top, not how many units can be shifted in the first week.    … Expand
  93. Ash1988PNE
    Nov 22, 2011
    2
    It's just a very poor game. Single player is ok nothing new and too easy 5 hours on veteran and that's with about 1 and half hours of cut scenes! Mutliplayer is shocking, the maps are rubbish, weapons look and sound rubbish! I play for fun, but there is no fun in this game with all the hackers and cheats! I thought it couldn't get any worse after Black Ops but MW3 has proven me wrong! OnlyIt's just a very poor game. Single player is ok nothing new and too easy 5 hours on veteran and that's with about 1 and half hours of cut scenes! Mutliplayer is shocking, the maps are rubbish, weapons look and sound rubbish! I play for fun, but there is no fun in this game with all the hackers and cheats! I thought it couldn't get any worse after Black Ops but MW3 has proven me wrong! Only decent thing in MW3 is spec ops when playing with a friend, although that very short as well. I think people with sense will see that activision is just after the money now, breaking records and not really giving a damn about the gamers. I'm just glad Skyrim came out a couple days after.… Expand
  94. Abdiel
    Dec 1, 2011
    2
    People giving this game a score above 5 should be shot in the head. This is the worst CoD I've played and the worst FPS experience in a CoD game, they literally re-used maps and textures from CoD4 and MW2. Multiplayer feels wrong, I don't know how to describe it but believe me...it fuc#$% sucks, if you're not living in USA it will take ages to find a game because it will look for localPeople giving this game a score above 5 should be shot in the head. This is the worst CoD I've played and the worst FPS experience in a CoD game, they literally re-used maps and textures from CoD4 and MW2. Multiplayer feels wrong, I don't know how to describe it but believe me...it fuc#$% sucks, if you're not living in USA it will take ages to find a game because it will look for local games, plus you'll be playing with the same people over and over again...This is the last Infinity Ward i buy before renting. Rent or pass.… Expand
  95. GeneticBlueprin
    Nov 24, 2011
    2
    In all honesty I approached this game with some skepticism. I loved Modern Warfare, but absolutely loathed Modern Warfare 2. A friend convinced me to buy the game, however, and after a couple weeks with the game my impressions are as follows:

    Campaign: Like Modern Warfare 2, it is pretty short. I beat it on hard (not veteran) in about 5 hours.The story is a bit more coherent this time    In all honesty I approached this game with some skepticism. I loved Modern Warfare, but absolutely loathed Modern Warfare 2. A friend convinced me to buy the game, however, and after a couple weeks with the game my impressions are as follows:

    Campaign: Like Modern Warfare 2, it is pretty short. I beat it on hard (not veteran) in about 5 hours.The story is a bit more coherent this time around, but I still feel nothing for and could care less about any of the characters. The scenery makes you feel like you're showing up after something totally awesome just happened, while the game guides you down a series of rails on turret guns half the time. "Meh" is really the only word to describe the experience. At best, the campaign is serviceable.

    Competitive MP: What a **** I thought MW2 was bad. This... this is something terrible. There is no shortage of frustrating WTF moments when watching kill cams. Perks ruin any semblance of balance. Killstreak rewards leave out any hint of fair competition (juggernaut suit, seriously?). The MP feels like I'm playing tag at an elementary school. Every map is a circle that has a pathway cutting through the middle; it just has a different coat of paint. Speaking of paint, the color scheme in the MP is awful. Each map picks a color and focuses on it which leaves everything just sort of blending together incoherently at medium to long distances. I know that it doesn't seem worth griping about, but stare at the screen long enough and it gets annoying. If people wanted evidence of copying and pasting, look no further than the MP. The dialog and voices are taken straight out of MW2. The sound files are literally pulled out of MW2. The MP constantly rewards you with trinkets to make you feel like you're progressing. I don't like that so much. If I'm doing bad, let me know. Don't tell me I was the best at falling from high places and surviving or spending the most time aiming through my scope. Tell me what I did that caused my team to lose. Don't try and make me feel good about things that don't matter.

    Co-op MP: The new survival mode is fun enough, but it doesn't do anything better than other games that offer similar modes. I can see myself going back to that mode for some fun with a friend, but why is it limited to two players when every other game out there offers a minimum of four? The same with spec ops. The spec ops mode is the same as MW2. It's fun for one play through, but there really isn't much point after that in my opinion. And the two-player limit is disappointing. I was hoping for bigger ops with more players. But it didn't deliver in that regard.

    Overall: People say the game is solid. This is true. A shooter that runs at 60 FPS consistently is hard to come by on a console these days. But, I would happily take a hit in FPS for more visual spice--some aspects actually look graphically worse than its predecessor--and improved animations (which are awful, by the way). The game engine is showing its age. I have a 1996 Subaru with 200,000 miles on it. It works. It gets me where I'm going. I fix it up and keep it working. But eventually it's going to die, and I wouldn't pay premium price for it. The same with this game. For that reason it's taking an additional hit on the overall score I would give it. This game is not a $60 game plain and simple. It's an expansion pack. While I do consider games art, I also factor in value. Modern Warfare 3 doesn't deliver on either front.

    Also, this isn't about BF3 vs. MW3. Modern Warfare 3 is bad REGARDLESS of Battlefield 3. Not because of it. It's just a game that falls on the higher side of poor.    … Expand
  96. HonestCritic
    Nov 24, 2011
    2
    I can't play this game because Activision have allowed a broken product to leave the developers studios. We are just three weeks post-release and already we have had 4 update patches - this means that the programming was not correct when it started to ship, i.e - an unfinished game, rushed to get it out in time for Christmas cash-in.

    The problem is that you must play with people from your    I can't play this game because Activision have allowed a broken product to leave the developers studios. We are just three weeks post-release and already we have had 4 update patches - this means that the programming was not correct when it started to ship, i.e - an unfinished game, rushed to get it out in time for Christmas cash-in.

    The problem is that you must play with people from your own country, but for smaller countries and States, nobody is online at all sometimes so you cannot play this game. I bought XBox Live to play people from around the world, not just my area code. There is no option to choose otherwise, so your chances on playing this game depends on whether or not someone else in your area code is online also which is a pain in the backside after 11pm to say the least as if it wasn't difficult already for smaller populated area's.
    For example, Europe is divided into individual countries instead of the E.U - all this makes matchmaking a total frustration. It's just definitely unplayable. Then we have the lag - the bouncing and jumping all over the place, the hitmarkers, the bullets that can turn corners, pointstreaks are overpowered (once a chopper is called in, you can't hide from it and SAM turrets take an age to take it down). There are glitches everywhere and the maps are not as good as previous installments yet, the talk about bringing them back such as Terminal, Favela, Crash, Shipment into MW3 doesn't make much sense to me because we've been asked to pay $100 for a NEW GAME, why bring back all the OLDER MAPS? Is this an acceptance that MW3 is not good enough? Or is it simply laziness on the developers part not to be creating new maps? It doesn't make any sense....

    However, even if all these bugs were fixed tomorrow by IW, Sledgehammer and Raven - the main problem with the Call of Duty franchise is the type of players it tends to attract. The community are not focused on winning the game as a team, and tend to ignore their bomb that has been detonated, their flag that has been captured or even to capture the dog tags in Kill Confirmed (which is the whole point of that gametype), it honestly bewilders the mind with a complete lack of any kind of recognition regarding the team mates and the objective. Ultimately, it is the mainstream light that COD has moved into during these past number of years that is ultimately killing the series altogether. The franchise has gone so mainstream now that the developers are no longer producing a game they aimed for back in 2007 with the release of MW1. I don't know who their target demographic are anymore, but it sure as hell is not the same people that purchased the original Call of Duty back in 2003. I gave this game a rating of 2 because i did enjoy the campaign, albeit a very short over-the-top cheesy and korny HollyWood style at times. If you have COD: MW2 - stick with that.

    I hope this helped.    … Expand
  97. andontoy
    Nov 24, 2011
    2
    After Black Ops, this game is a huge fail. I loved black ops, and the gameplay, movement, and overall feel of this game is terrible. This is a huge step back for this franchise. I do not recommend this game to anyone. That, and I was one of the people who had those stupid disc read errors, got to play it, and wondered why I was upset I couldn't play it. Trade this game in for anotherAfter Black Ops, this game is a huge fail. I loved black ops, and the gameplay, movement, and overall feel of this game is terrible. This is a huge step back for this franchise. I do not recommend this game to anyone. That, and I was one of the people who had those stupid disc read errors, got to play it, and wondered why I was upset I couldn't play it. Trade this game in for another game, not worth it.… Expand
  98. Sparlywag
    Nov 25, 2011
    2
    I joined the COD franchise with Call of Duty. I joined online multiplayer FPS gameplay with Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. I have been playing with the same friends online since COD 4. We played all of the games from COD 4 to World at War, to Modern Warfare 2, Black Ops, and now......Modern Warfare 3. I guess you could say Im a fanboy...........
    We all know that the majority of COD    I joined the COD franchise with Call of Duty. I joined online multiplayer FPS gameplay with Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. I have been playing with the same friends online since COD 4. We played all of the games from COD 4 to World at War, to Modern Warfare 2, Black Ops, and now......Modern Warfare 3. I guess you could say Im a fanboy...........
    We all know that the majority of COD fans buy the games nowadays for the multiplayer experience that COD 4 pioneered. I consider myself and my friends to be a pretty well skilled group of players who have spent alot of time and money on these games. All of them until Modern Warfare 3 would have recieved a moderate to high score from me. But I do not feel as if Sledgehammer, or IW really listened to the gaming community before they made this game. If they had, there would have been a clear and tangible difference to the newest addition. Sure we all know that the game is going to be VERY similar to the others. We pay for the game knowing this. But we ALL expect each and every new addition to be an improvement on the last games. With so many COD's before Modern Warfare 3, there simply is no excuse for the plethora of issues this game has. Sure, at times, it is a fun game. But when entire groups of players 6 or more in numbers are getting fed up and going back to Modern Warfare 2 or even Black Ops, ( God Forbid), Sledgehammer, IW, this is a problem. I have both Modern Warfare 3, and Battlefield 3 and I can honestly say I have had more fun, and less frustration playing battlefield 3, even without people I know, than I have Modern Warfare 3. The way I see these games, they are an investment. And after 300$ for all three Modern Warfare games and Black Ops, (not to mention DLC for all of them), I am beginning to think I have invested in the wrong game to provide me my fun. To the makers of EVERY Call of Duty game: Thank You, it has been a wild ride. But we are growing apart. I just cant stay in a relationship where I give and give and give, and you take and take and take without any concern for my opinion on the matter. Save yourself the heartache of a lost 60$.    … Expand
  99. BlazenBones
    Nov 25, 2011
    2
    Sorry for the false hope. My rating was suppose to be only a 2. NOT a 10. Well I guess I have write some more because it was to short. All I can say peeps is save your money for when the price drops, it might be worth it by then.
  100. Ddark624
    Nov 26, 2011
    2
    Well what can I say... I like most people here was very much looking forward to the release of this installment, as was for the most part, extremely disappointed. The only part of the game I enjoyed was the story line and that was only because it distracted me from the shocking multi player. In my opinion the multi player on mw3 is worse than any of it's predecessors. The first thing toWell what can I say... I like most people here was very much looking forward to the release of this installment, as was for the most part, extremely disappointed. The only part of the game I enjoyed was the story line and that was only because it distracted me from the shocking multi player. In my opinion the multi player on mw3 is worse than any of it's predecessors. The first thing to note is the maps, which are either ridiculously small or way too big with about a million objects for people to camp or hide in. Then we have the shockingly over powered weapons... In black ops, u at least had a second to react if you came under fire, whereas in this u literally see the small red marker from the direction you have been shot from and then u find ur self dead... To add insult to injury they have also reduced the power of weapons like the grenade launcher and rockets so you can pretty much walk away from a direct hit. Oh and u also have sniper bullets that can kill 2-3 people with 1 shot one minute, then just bounce off when u hit someone directly in the chest the next. And just like everyone else has mentioned, I'm sure we all love respawning in front of the guy who just killed us so that we can get killed again... So overall if ur thinking of buying this game dont, and if you have, take it back as soon as you can before its only worth a tenner and Uve lost loads of cash and hours of life you'll never get 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 »