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. JoeAReed
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    All though this game has the same graphics as COD MOD 2 and the game play really didn't change at all. I find this game to a solid title, with a excellent multi-player. If you get this game you won't be disappointed for two reasons: exciting campaign mode, and an excellent on-line multi-player.
  2. RYNO187
    Nov 9, 2011
    9
    Unbelievable how many 0 reviews there are. Crazy how everyone waited in line at midnight to troll. If you played from the beginning to black ops you'll enjoy. If you hate cod this is more of the same. I myself liked the game.
  3. LordSynergy
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    I have played every Call of Duty from the beginning and I can tell you that this new one has some of the worst multiplayer maps I have ever played in a shooter. I have never been so disappointed in a new game purchase this big, ever... While it still feels Modern Warfarish, it definitely is too fast paced now, to the point of just complete chaos. Skill is no longer a requirement, butI have played every Call of Duty from the beginning and I can tell you that this new one has some of the worst multiplayer maps I have ever played in a shooter. I have never been so disappointed in a new game purchase this big, ever... While it still feels Modern Warfarish, it definitely is too fast paced now, to the point of just complete chaos. Skill is no longer a requirement, but luck of spawn is. They have yet to fix the spawn system, even though this is the 3rd generation of the game. If you aren't spawned in front of an enemy, there is another one in any direction in front of you. This leads me to map design, the maps are fairly small compared to previous games, and there aren't any real good ones that make you excited to see the map again. They even feel as though someone else designed them, which leads me to believe the guys that left Infinity Ward during production, really didn't have much of a hand in the map design. Lastly, I feel like I'm back in the same grind of the first 2 games, it doesn't feel fresh and new like it once did, which might be expected and not all bad, but it really causes one to loose interest quicker. I wish I could say more good things about the game, but I truely am disappointed, there just isn't alot of consistency in this games multiplayer, and playing it really feels like an old quake multiplayer match but with too many players. I think I'll be returning this on Friday towards Skyrim.… Expand
  4. shez
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Boring and outdated in every single aspect, from the sound design, to the graphics and even the ingame menus, this game can't even dare exist agaist the other triple A competitors. You know what i'm talking about...It's more like...THE competitor.
  5. Aurorix
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    A 4 hour campaign, lack of innovation, old engine, recycled models, textures, sound files and the gameplay is the same as in MW2. If you look at it as a game for itself, it isn't bad, but if you look at it as the third game of the MW series, which it is, then it's just a damn expensive update.
  6. kholland65
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    I had very high expectations for this game and for some reason I figured this was it. This was going to be the cream of the crop. The game that would be so perfect I would play it for years. I was wrong. This game is not innovative or different from the other COD's but frankly that is not the reason for my bad rating. I don't mind a recycled game, as long as they simply polish the old oneI had very high expectations for this game and for some reason I figured this was it. This was going to be the cream of the crop. The game that would be so perfect I would play it for years. I was wrong. This game is not innovative or different from the other COD's but frankly that is not the reason for my bad rating. I don't mind a recycled game, as long as they simply polish the old one and make it better. They did fix a few things in this game but at the expense of breaking others. Overall I would give the campaign a 7. Mostly because it was way to short. should have been about twice as long. Yeah it's a bit repetitive but it was still fun. Even those who gave this a poor rating have to admit that there aren't really that many other FPS's who overall have as good of campaigns as COD. The multiplayer on the other hand is total garbage. I would give the multiplayer a 2. Just so many things wrong with it. Prob the worst multiplayer out of mw1, 2, waw, bops. Could be because sledgehammer worked on the multiplayer. who knows. Anyway here are some of the problems I've seen with the multiplayer. 1. The lag compensation is horrible idea. Worst invention in gaming. For those who don't know what that is, its basically an artificially induced lag on those with good connections. In theory this sounds like a good idea but it never works. Basically your playing a game with everyone lagging. Ever have a situation where you turn a corner only to be killed in .01sec by what seems like a single bullet and a player with godlike reflexes, only to see on the killcam that he in fact saw you for quite some time and fired a hail of bullets? You can thank lag compensation for that. 2. The maps are horrible. They're full of choke points that make objective games unfair depending on where your spawning. They are many times one sided giving the lucky team the spawns with the high ground, allowing them to pin you into a corner. They lack open space with long distance shooting lanes. Everywhere you turn your view is obstructed by something forcing nothing but close quarter combat. 3. quickscoping, nuff said.
    4. Bullet dmg is weak. Makes it tough to quickly snap and kill multiple enemies unless they are in a line since you waste 5sec and half a clip to kill the first which by then his teammate has killed you. Long distance kills have become super difficult because now people have plenty of time to duck behind cover after being hit by the first spray of bullets. After every game take a look at the assists. There are now tons of them because nobody can finish off their own kills. When it only takes 3-4 bullets to kill someone, that doesn't leave much time for a teammate to come in and steal your kill but 5-6 is plenty of time for them to pop off one bullet after they see you firing. I even had 9 assists just by myself in one TDM game. WTF is that!
    5. Most killstreaks are completely OP. Black ops I actually think had a decent balance of killstreaks. Dog's and the chopper gunner were easy to counter with rockets our your own gun. 6. Giant names above enemies is dumb. I used to pride myself on being able to stop a tiny spec of an enemy across the map, now they just gave everyone that ability with 6inch name plates that pop up if they aim anywhere near me. No point in even hiding behind cover because if even so much as your pinky toe is sticking out your full name shows up. These name plates also block your view. The stupid things sits right on top of the guy and I can't even see what I'm shooting at. 7. Spawns are decent but have their moments. I've literally been spawned 10ft in front of an enemy or right in the line of fire between 2 people. However, I do see less of situations where the entire team all of a sudden starts spawning right on top of you and your pro camp spot. 8. Kill confirmed gametype is completely dumb. At the very least show us how many tags we've collected along with our overall kills. Yeah Mripwnnewbs might have 50 kills but is he even picking up any dog tags? We have no way of knowing. 9. Headquarters is still luck based. Keeps one team constantly spawning on the new location. Frankly it's kinda a flawed gametype to begin with but w/e.
    10. Create a class interface is cumbersome. When customizing certain aspects of my gun (attachments, camo, etc. ) I should have to keep going through all the menus of choices to get to the one I want. there should be separate menus for each of those things like in bops. I also hate the killstreak interface. I hate how if I go from say, assault to support for example just to unlock or switch my selection, it automatically switches me to that type. I can't tell you how many times I've started a game with the wrong killstreak package because I switched it on me when all I wanted to do was unlock somehting new or reselect my 3 choices for future use. So far no COD has held my attention better than MW1. It was simple and polished.    … Expand
  7. ClashCityRocker
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Inferior to the PS3 version, but both versions are not worth it. Really old and been there, done that.. If you have played MW2, don't bother with this, buy Uncharted 3 or something worthwhile instead., don't waste your money on this game, it's simply not worth it.
  8. Skinshifter
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Resumed in 3 words. Copy-paste game. Is a waste of time and money having a game which has not been improved. Sorry to the fanboys of COD, but Infinity can not beat EA and DICE online entertaiment, you gotta recognize it.
  9. idiotsbreeding
    Nov 9, 2011
    9
    0???? You fanboys are pathetic. I don't think that there has ever been a game that deserved a 0. If Battlefield 3 is so great then why are you not playing the game instead of sitting on here giving a great game a 0? This game is awesome and just plain fun to play. Battlefield 3 is a completely DIFFERENT game. I don't even understand why these two games are being compared. Modern Warfare 30???? You fanboys are pathetic. I don't think that there has ever been a game that deserved a 0. If Battlefield 3 is so great then why are you not playing the game instead of sitting on here giving a great game a 0? This game is awesome and just plain fun to play. Battlefield 3 is a completely DIFFERENT game. I don't even understand why these two games are being compared. Modern Warfare 3 is fun which is the most important thing in my opinion. Is EA paying you guys to sit here and write bad reviews? Are you the same people who bought Madden over and over for years without any improvements? What exactly are you guys fighting for? A greedy corporation? Pathetic! Super Mario Brothers has looked the same for what 20 years? I think they are using the same engine! Do you guys even know what that means? Yet Super Mario is still fun to play which is all that matters to me. Get a life idiots!… Expand
  10. blbeezie
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    first of its only 935 negative reviews out of 2 million plus players. second off, this game rocks! to all those that bash this game, maybe this game should bash you. You are expecting this game to completely revamp what makes this game so successful. yes its the same game but with a few additions, but Madden is the same game too every year with a few additions. why fix it if it isn'tfirst of its only 935 negative reviews out of 2 million plus players. second off, this game rocks! to all those that bash this game, maybe this game should bash you. You are expecting this game to completely revamp what makes this game so successful. yes its the same game but with a few additions, but Madden is the same game too every year with a few additions. why fix it if it isn't broken. this game is a must have for all you cod players that are ready for a new feel while staying in the boundaries of what makes this series so GREAT!!… Expand
  11. Stuperman
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    Copy and paste. Absolutely loved the previous 2 but come on now how many more windows am i going to kick through to clear a room in slow mo. i like the teamwork direction in kill confirmed but man running ten yards after the spawn to kill guys with the same flavor as the others is kinda getting old.
  12. carlb
    Nov 9, 2011
    6
    Fans of the series will enjoy it but you'd be better off buying a used copy. *** SINGLE PLAYER: This final episode brings the story to a conclusion that will leave most satisfied and does it with flare and style in an enjoyable manner. *** SPEC OPS: If you have the friends to play with, these will keep you engaged for quite some time. *** MULTIPLAYER: Subtle changes that continue theFans of the series will enjoy it but you'd be better off buying a used copy. *** SINGLE PLAYER: This final episode brings the story to a conclusion that will leave most satisfied and does it with flare and style in an enjoyable manner. *** SPEC OPS: If you have the friends to play with, these will keep you engaged for quite some time. *** MULTIPLAYER: Subtle changes that continue the tradition started with previous titles and simple refine what has existed for many years. *** PERFORMANCE: Graphics and sound are both sub-par compared to other titles that have come out this year and the IW engine is showing its age. The guns are the same as previously and do not handle well nor sound as one might hope and animations are clunky. It's time for the Call of Duty team to step up and move beyond their existing technology. Performance is snappy and only trivial bugs were encountered. *** FINAL THOUGHTS: Every die hard first person shooter fan will likely find something in this game that they will enjoy though if you were already growing tired of the other games in the series, this one won't offer anything new or exciting. If you value and desire team work, look elsewhere. If you're on the fence, wait and buy it once the price comes down or pick up a used copy. *** NOTES: Elite was not tested and is not included in this review as the servers were unavailable due to overloading.… Expand
  13. Adamfeive
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    I am a call of duty fan, Im in it for the multiplayer, got my copy of MW3 yesterday, ran home popped it in,
    and heres whats up;
    They seem to have spent all there time tweaking the frills and inconsequential nic naks, rather than focus on game play, they should know everyone who is buying MW3 has been playing black ops for months. Black Ops is like butter to MW3's sand paper. Cons:    I am a call of duty fan, Im in it for the multiplayer, got my copy of MW3 yesterday, ran home popped it in,
    and heres whats up;

    They seem to have spent all there time tweaking the frills and inconsequential nic naks, rather than focus on game play, they should know everyone who is buying MW3 has been playing black ops for months. Black Ops is like butter to MW3's sand paper.
    Cons: 1)clunky controls, same old layout, just feels slow, like your avatar is 350lb, which means its a Campers paradise...running and gunning,,will leave you wondering how did this guy shoot me from 200 yrds and around a corner, 2)maps are uncreative, they look great, but 90% of what you see you can't interact with, there is no freedom of movement, or freedom to be creative in your play
    3) lastly its just not an improvement on Black Ops, we want to see the envelope pushed, not a turd polished
    4) Spawning is mind bogglingly terrible,,,I can't even begin to say how poor this aspect is, I don't think I even have the words to articulate the almost blatant neglect
    5) and lastly,, after a couple of hours of play, and achieving a 35 rank I just stopped,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and thought this is hellof boring, I can't believe the nerve of Activision asking people to pay $50 bucks for the elite package of such a amazingly boring multiplayer game,,,,

    I'm going over to best buy right now and returning it, not even going to give it another go    … Expand
  14. glasgowsmile
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    This was simply an over-hyped expansion pack. Many of the things I felt Black Ops did well seem to have been ditched as they essentially took MW2, added a few new things, and called it a new game entirely. I bought this only to hold me until Skyrim's release and sadly I'm going to return it before Skyrim and continue playing Batman.
  15. Brother3Wright
    Nov 9, 2011
    6
    MW3 is not a bad game, and to those new to the series it'll probably be something new and exciting. For those that have been following CoD for a while now though it's one step forward, two steps back. Gone is the customization, money system, and emblem creation from Black Ops that helped move the series forward. Instead those are replaced by the same systems that already existed in MW2. IMW3 is not a bad game, and to those new to the series it'll probably be something new and exciting. For those that have been following CoD for a while now though it's one step forward, two steps back. Gone is the customization, money system, and emblem creation from Black Ops that helped move the series forward. Instead those are replaced by the same systems that already existed in MW2. I personally took a break and didn't buy Black Ops as I had burnt out on MW2. I had thought that with new blood at Infinity Ward they would continue to move the series forward, but instead they moved a bunch of stuff around, renamed some other stuff and added very little that's actually "new". I feel like this is an alternate reality in which Black Ops didn't exist, instead of building off the improvements that game made they used MW2 as a base and built off of that. That's all fine and well, but the problem is that Black Ops DID exist and already made improvements to some of the systems MW2 and 3 use. So while MW3 isn't a bad game by any means, it isn't particularly innovative or exciting either.… Expand
  16. bigpapapool
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    BF3 fanboys shouldn't be allowed to post, really this is just to counter act them. It's a solid 9.5 game though. I own both games and I almost sold bf3 within first 30 minutes after having huge lag, server connection, and rediculos downloads dor graphics, 2 disks retarded! Mw3 had nothing like this and blew me away at how smooth and how much anoying stuff they fixed from old games. LoveBF3 fanboys shouldn't be allowed to post, really this is just to counter act them. It's a solid 9.5 game though. I own both games and I almost sold bf3 within first 30 minutes after having huge lag, server connection, and rediculos downloads dor graphics, 2 disks retarded! Mw3 had nothing like this and blew me away at how smooth and how much anoying stuff they fixed from old games. Love new kill streak system. Buy the game and you bf3 looses stop posting horri.ble reviews… Expand
  17. Xexion
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    How can you rate a game as a 0? When it is not a game.
    The game adds relatively nothing new:
    An over-the-top Michael Bays campaign (anywhere from 6-10 hours of gameplay) New Spec-Ops missions New Maps (albeit reusing assets from even COD4) New Weapons This isn't a game, this is an expansion to MW2. When you innovate too much in a sequel, you can lose players by not keeping the experience    How can you rate a game as a 0? When it is not a game.
    The game adds relatively nothing new:
    An over-the-top Michael Bays campaign (anywhere from 6-10 hours of gameplay)
    New Spec-Ops missions
    New Maps (albeit reusing assets from even COD4)
    New Weapons

    This isn't a game, this is an expansion to MW2.
    When you innovate too much in a sequel, you can lose players by not keeping the experience of the previous game
    When you don't innovate, your essentially selling the same thing two years later for $60.
    TLDR; let me copy from MW2 like MW3 is:
    SSDD (Same S**t Different Day)    … Expand
  18. Hammertime
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Ok we all know CoD games have come out annually since MW, and we all know we cant expect much innovation even though there is a 2 year development cycle for each game. Treyarch does nothing to add to the series except resking the previous iteration. Usually MW is where we get the biggest step in innovating the series. But this one doesnt even pull from black ops yet pulls from MW2 and justOk we all know CoD games have come out annually since MW, and we all know we cant expect much innovation even though there is a 2 year development cycle for each game. Treyarch does nothing to add to the series except resking the previous iteration. Usually MW is where we get the biggest step in innovating the series. But this one doesnt even pull from black ops yet pulls from MW2 and just adds a few new guns/perks and maps, back in the day this used to be called an expansion and was usually around 20 bucks. For instance CoD:United Offensive, they added a great campaign (probably the greatest in the CoD franchise) and that lasted around 10 hours. They also added a full game worth full of maps. Newer weapons and they added vehicles, all of that for 20 bucks and that was 2 fold more content that the full MW3 game priced at 3 times the ammount of UO.… Expand
  19. OllieJ
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is a huge improvement from Modern Warfare 2. Spec Ops has gotten better, the new Survival mode is fun and addicting, the Singleplayer Campaign is very good, and very fun, I enjoyed the story the most out of them all.

    The multiplayer is great, it's been improved a lot since Modern Warfare 2, it's very balanced, fast-paced and it's the way a Call of Duty    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is a huge improvement from Modern Warfare 2. Spec Ops has gotten better, the new Survival mode is fun and addicting, the Singleplayer Campaign is very good, and very fun, I enjoyed the story the most out of them all.

    The multiplayer is great, it's been improved a lot since Modern Warfare 2, it's very balanced, fast-paced and it's the way a Call of Duty mutliplayer should be.    … Expand
  20. Raficoo
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    to sum it up all in one word: MW2.5
    The only thing that has been added to the game was a new campaign, some weapons and a "weapon-progression" system. The graphics is still the same, lame old repetitive sounds from MW2(just new for the weapons) and still the same ol Run-n-Gun idea from COD 4.
  21. jeffmace
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    Seriously it didn't take more than a few minutes of gameplay to see this that this is the same exact stuff that we have been fed for a while. The running makes me sick, it is just dumb gameplay. Thank god for Skyrim coming out in two days, i will never put this in my console again. I really hope this is the last of the series and it will try to reinvent itself again in the future.
  22. denxing
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    Let's talk about the singleplayer first. It's incredibly shallow. 5 hours? That's not even $10 an hour. The story is ridiculously retarded. Also, killing virtual little girls just for shock value? I could care less that they put that into the game but it's a good metaphor for the type of fluff game they produced. They don't care about making a good game, they just care about doing thingsLet's talk about the singleplayer first. It's incredibly shallow. 5 hours? That's not even $10 an hour. The story is ridiculously retarded. Also, killing virtual little girls just for shock value? I could care less that they put that into the game but it's a good metaphor for the type of fluff game they produced. They don't care about making a good game, they just care about doing things to make their game more "newsworthy" and simply for the monetary game. It's like that airport level all over again.

    Now, the multiplayer. It's stiff and rigid. Barriers everywhere. Tiny maps. And they still don't do things that games like Quake 3 have been doing for at least a decade. No dedicated servers? No ability to play custom user made maps? No user made content AT ALL. No custom made user modes. Hell, Halo 3 let's you do that. There's no innovation what-so-ever. Same guns. Same sounds. Same run 'n gun fluff BS. The netcode is awful. How many times have I died while shooting at an enemy only to look at the killcam and watch myself not even turn towards the enemy. Or what's with dying and having all of your bullets that were in transit disappear? You can never shoot your enemy and kill him at the same time he kills you.

    What happened to the days where you could could filter a server list by types of maps or types of game modes? Yeah, like a dedicated server that runs a roulette of a certain type of game mode. Or even map voting or game mode voting. There's nothing. The only thing MW ever had going for it was it's invention of the online FPS RPG system and what do they do? They drag it out. They don't even build on what they've built before. How about instead of prestige-ing, only to do the same things OVER AND OVER again, you invent something NEW? How about new and interesting maps that aren't just random sandscapes with military vehicles or boxes strewn about? How about stop taking advantage of your customers and create a god damn game instead of this copy and paste job that is MW3. How about that.    … Expand
  23. Chimaybleu
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Man, do I feel cheated. I bought this for PC (for multiplayer) and Xbox 360 (for single player) and got a tweeked version of MW2 :( Activision, give me back my money! That said, the single player campaign is not bad and perfect for a relaxed gaming session. Like all COD games you just run along a predestined course with pretty easy resistance so it does not require your undividedMan, do I feel cheated. I bought this for PC (for multiplayer) and Xbox 360 (for single player) and got a tweeked version of MW2 :( Activision, give me back my money! That said, the single player campaign is not bad and perfect for a relaxed gaming session. Like all COD games you just run along a predestined course with pretty easy resistance so it does not require your undivided attention - perfect for "the day after" :) Multiplayer is a lot simpler than most of the other titles out there, so anyone can compete on equal level. Play it on Xbox and you dont even need fast reflexes som anybody can play, even old farts like me. The PC version thought, reguire that you are young or have an extraordinary nervous system och great eye-hand coordination. But then again, most multiplayer console titles are better suited for elder gamers like me who is "reflex and precision impaired by age" :) Overall multiplayer is great fun, but not suited for competetive gaming.… Expand
  24. DecaturStaley
    Nov 9, 2011
    9
    I have to say that there is something severely wrong with some of these reviews... a zero!!! Wow, how do you give a game a zero. Also, how can you write a review on a game you have not played nor will you ever play. Just goes to show that there are a lot of Call of Duty haters out there. I am not saying this is the greatest or most realistic shooter game of all time. If I wanted aI have to say that there is something severely wrong with some of these reviews... a zero!!! Wow, how do you give a game a zero. Also, how can you write a review on a game you have not played nor will you ever play. Just goes to show that there are a lot of Call of Duty haters out there. I am not saying this is the greatest or most realistic shooter game of all time. If I wanted a realistic shooter game I'd go back to playing Rainbow Six or Ghost Recon. However I like to have a fast paced shooter game with short load times, which MW3 has. I'd say graphics wise Battlefield wins that category, but the amount of options within multiplayer are better on MW3. No game ever deserves a zero.… Expand
  25. ShottyMcLagcamp
    Nov 9, 2011
    6
    I have owned every COD since COD 2. I don't own this one and have only played it for a few hours over a friends. To be blunt COD4 and WAW were VERY good games. But after that MW2 and BLOPS were all the same game. I get it "if it aint broke dont fix it". But even sports games that are the same thing every year know that you need to ADD something to keep your fan base. And thats after theyI have owned every COD since COD 2. I don't own this one and have only played it for a few hours over a friends. To be blunt COD4 and WAW were VERY good games. But after that MW2 and BLOPS were all the same game. I get it "if it aint broke dont fix it". But even sports games that are the same thing every year know that you need to ADD something to keep your fan base. And thats after they get roster changes and natural changes. Why cant MW3 add a custom player, custom factions, war mode, more players, vehicles (WAW) ANYTHING! But the game still isnt unplayable. But I feel most of the reviews are 0s because people felt like they were robbed.… Expand
  26. RockandGrohl
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Absolute trash.

    I literally can't believe the sheep idealogic of gamers these days. I can NOT believe that people are so willing to pay money hand over fist for the same game every year. E-V-E-R-Y Y-E-A-R! Let's start off with the obvious. This game costs £10 more than the RRP of games in the UK (£40) why? Because they can. This game forced Microsoft to bump    Absolute trash.

    I literally can't believe the sheep idealogic of gamers these days. I can NOT believe that people are so willing to pay money hand over fist for the same game every year. E-V-E-R-Y Y-E-A-R!

    Let's start off with the obvious. This game costs £10 more than the RRP of games in the UK (£40) why? Because they can.

    This game forced Microsoft to bump the price of Xbox Live (terrible service anyway, it should be free) and then Activision takes all that extra money. Why? Because they can.

    This game will have at least 4 batches of Multiplayer DLC which cost a quarter of the games price each time, so now Activision have you strung so hard you pay for the game TWICE for content that any half-competent modding team could churn out in a fortnight - from a bedroom.

    In addition to all those extra charges, they've decided to release Call of Duty Elite. And because their fan base are such epic retards, they'll see 'Elite' and go "Hey! I want to be elite!" and buy it, all it is is a stat-tracking system and it gives you a reduction on the DLC cost and probably some extra **** in game. **** doo. That's absolutely no reason to charge £35 / $50 other than to gip off the fans which they are absolutely excellent at.


    Now lets look at the game. For a start, it's had way less than 2 years development time. This is NOT ACCEPTABLE for a game that makes waves as big as COD makes. Do some math, IF the game sells 30,000,000 copies, and of the $70 that the game costs, $25 of that goes to the developers, then they are making $750,000,000 bi-yearly on the game, not forgetting that the COD-train keeps rolling each year picking up more idiots as it goes, so each year it seems to make more money.

    So 750 Million dollars straight to developers, and they do nothing with it. Proof? Look at the **** assets in the game. More than half of them are ripped straight from COD4 / MW2 / Black Ops. This is atrocious video game design, developers should be striving to re-make assets, make them better, not just re-texture (or in most cases, straight export - import) and call it a day.


    So they have all these assets, all the work they need to do is - Work out the basic plot and conclusion (which is completely lacklustre)

    Create a 4-5 hour long campaign, that requires map making, but half your assets are already here so basically it's like creating a map in the CryEngine 2 Sandbox creator - piece of absolute piss. Shouldn't take long.

    Record the voice acting


    They DON'T really need to code anything new, seeing as it's just new maps, skins and dialogues.

    That's campaign out the way, for Multiplayer, just make some new maps, doesn't take long, add some new weapons / attachments in, again, doesn't take long, and then job done.



    How they can justify that this game is worth the price is utterly baffling. Just, completely and utterly baffling. Considering they knocked it out so quickly, Activision are onto a winner here. And I can assure you they are laughing all the way to the bank with this. "I can't believe these idiots are buying the same **** year after year!"


    Look out for the next COD game in 2012, made by Treyarch. I guarantee you, I would willingly bet my life and my families lives that it will be Black Ops 1.5 - Just new ham-handled 4 hour story, more maps and a small assortment of new weapons.



    Do yourselves a favour and buy Battlefield 3. Really, BF 2 came out in 2005 and this is just a tremendous leap for gaming, and DICE truly deserve the praise.


    What the **** is going on with reviewers? They're handing out above 9 scores like it's Candy on Halloween. One reviewer is quoted as saying "The Spec-Ops mode is worth the price of admission alone"

    let's break that down, the few hour co-op mode is worth the $70 it costs for the game.

    Somebody forbid that site from reviewing games ever again as it's clear they don't have the first clue what they're talking about.


    Get BF3. Get a game that took longer than a year to develop. Get a game where the developers don't take years to fix bugs that then appear in the following games (Care package glitch, anyone?) Get a game with some heart in it.    … Expand
  27. NathWFC
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    Only a few months ago I told myself and others that talked to me about MW3 that there was no way I would buy the game this year. Even before this latest installment I was sick of the lack of innovation or even slight advancement in the COD games since Call of Duty 4, but still, somehow, in the days leading up to the release I managed to let myself get caught up in the hype once more andOnly a few months ago I told myself and others that talked to me about MW3 that there was no way I would buy the game this year. Even before this latest installment I was sick of the lack of innovation or even slight advancement in the COD games since Call of Duty 4, but still, somehow, in the days leading up to the release I managed to let myself get caught up in the hype once more and purchased it on release day. Bad choice.

    So, where do I start? Well, let's be honest, COD is a multiplayer game, we all know the campaign is always incredibly average and so it's no surprise that in that respect that is again the case this year, but when a game that leans so heavily towards it's multiplayer starts to fail in that area too, well, then you've got real problems.

    The guns, attachments, perks and kill streaks all remain largely exactly the same as MW2, and I can live with that, but the maps are just truly and utterly ABYSMAL. I have put quite a few hours into the multiplayer so far and I can honestly say I haven't come across one single map that I've found remotely interesting or fun, the lack of effort and imagination is quite disgraceful. Everything looks a shade grey, there's far too much debris and **** everywhere breaking up the play, there's a ridiculous amount of pointless corridors on every map meaning there's very little space (as with the unbelievable amounts of debris), too many needless height levels break up the flow of the game and as a general package the maps just seem like an awful re-hash of a number of older maps poorly squashed together with minimal to no effort.

    At the end of the day, MW3 has and will do it's job - make a **** load of money, but I find it sad that a company and a franchise that rakes in as much cash as it does, is so happy to completely rest on their laurels and sell the game purely off of the brand name and the hype, rather than even make the slightest effort to show some imagination and effort to innovate or even just advance the game a little bit and actually achieve something that they can genuinely be proud of.

    I just hope to god that other gaming companies and franchises don't start to follow suite with the lack of ambition and laziness that the once great COD franchise has.    … Expand
  28. recklessabaddon
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    Good game, much like the previous versions of the game (if it's fun why change it?). Extremely fun multiplayer, the tweaks compared to MW2 have made it an overall better game in my opinion. Lots of people from **** are coming on here and complaining about it, in a way that seems more like they just don't like the style of gameplay that CoD represents. But people seem to like complainingGood game, much like the previous versions of the game (if it's fun why change it?). Extremely fun multiplayer, the tweaks compared to MW2 have made it an overall better game in my opinion. Lots of people from **** are coming on here and complaining about it, in a way that seems more like they just don't like the style of gameplay that CoD represents. But people seem to like complaining about something that they probably don't even own. Very fun game!… Expand
  29. Cyrus_VII
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This contains some spoilers

    This game suffers from digital schizophrenia. On the one hand you have truly brilliant set pieces in tight controlled environments against intelligent enemies, and on the other MUCH larger hand you have monotonous fire fight campaigns where you repeatedly shoot the same combat armour clad bad guys who respawn just off of screen. As a headline that sums this game up quite well.

    I should stop at this point to say that I was a massive fan of the original MW. It came out at a time when 99% of big name console FPS releases were set squarely in WW2, it broke a trend that had led me to stop buying first person shooters because I had pretty much seen it all before. Cod4 for me revolutionised how stories were told in gaming from the opening sequence where you took the role of Yasir Al-Fulani being bundled into a car, with the player having no real idea of where you were going but having no doubt that it would be bad, to playing Sgt Paul Jackson for a fair portion of the game only to end up crawling out of a downed chinook after a nuclear strike and inevitably dying in the street, it shook up the tired formula that had persisted to that point. In MW2 these devices were evolved continued to be used with great effect. Very few of us saw our eventual betrayal at the hands of Gen Shepherd coming, I know it annoyed me when Roach was killed (in a good way) and for a game to actually raise some sort of emotion in a 'meh' generation gamer was quite an achievement. I make these points because they show how great the series has been, and they best illustrate how poor a successor MW3 really is. To get the most grating bit for me out of the way first, the story is a mish-mash at best, you find yourself jumping from body to body so frequently you never really have the time to learn the characters name, let alone care about them. As mentioned when Roach was shot and set on fire I was physically annoyed as it was my character that I'd plodded through the story with and started to identify. This time round within an hour a Russian body guard you've played as for all of five minutes cops a bullet in the chest and you barely blink. I personally couldn't care because I had no attachment to this faceless, voiceless and might as well be nameless bodyguard, for all I knew he could be a kitten strangler and being wasted was just karma catching up with him. As a side note these twist are a double edged sword, why am I forced to keep a guy alive if he's just going to die in 5 minutes anyway? In MW2 and MW3 both times this happens there are plenty of other NPC's who could complete the objective for me so why is it so important that I make it to the precise point death is waiting for me? Anyhow...

    Another character I couldn't care less about is Yuri, another faceless, voiceless nobody who you play through the (let's face it, better) task force 141 campaign. It seems like a real mis-step after having played the brilliantly paced back end of MW2 as Soap, to dump you in the body of someone else to view him from afar. It's not that I'm in love with Soap, I just admire the budding bro-mance between him and Price, and to have to sit as the third wheel watching that manly love blossom kills me. So that's a some of the bad out of the way (I can't be bothered to point out the obvious that killing wave after wave of identi-kit bad guys until you reach the checkpoint that magically halts their spawn gets real boring real quick) I'll move on to the good, and that is the set pieces. They are parts of this game that still have some magic left. A personal favourite was scuttling and hijacking a Russian nuclear sub, using it's missiles to sink the rest of the Russian fleet and then escaping on a Zodiac and driving (do you drive a boat?) right into the loading bay of a waiting helicopter. It was a spectacle and handled in a way that made you feel pretty bad ass, but that was ten bright, shiny minutes from an hours grey and boring gameplay. And that's why this game deserves such a low score, for every stand out moment there's 5 dull missions you drudge through as quickly as you can to try to get to them. This game isn't a revolution, it isn't even a evolution of the previous titles, it's emulation of MW's much earlier greats and that's why those calling it Modern Warfare 2.5 have summed this game up better than I ever could.    … Expand
  30. HachiMana
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    This is an eye destroyer.
    The FOV is just ridicules.
    MW3 is just MW2.5... the game gives nothing new to the genre and looks so poor.
    If Activision are smart they will create a new game and make it good enough to compete with BF.
  31. Chimichunga
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    I'm giving this a 10 just to counteract all the retards who have given it a 0. For everyone who is saying itâ
  32. gamesalot19
    Nov 9, 2011
    5
    0 guys? Come on. No it is not a good game, but we didn't spend 60 dollars and get a blank disk.. Like all COD's, its not perfect. But if you have friends who play multiplayer, it is fun, even borderline addicting. They cleaned it up a bit. They least got rid of the Noob class (one man army, danger close, grenade launcher), and the players with mods are at least less obvious(haven't seen0 guys? Come on. No it is not a good game, but we didn't spend 60 dollars and get a blank disk.. Like all COD's, its not perfect. But if you have friends who play multiplayer, it is fun, even borderline addicting. They cleaned it up a bit. They least got rid of the Noob class (one man army, danger close, grenade launcher), and the players with mods are at least less obvious(haven't seen any single shot weapons shooting fully auto at my face through a wall....yet).

    I always beat the campaigns before I touch multiplayer and this was the first time I've needed to quit the campaign.Typical issues but to the extreme; respawning enemies who always know where you are and only shoot at you, less than useless teammates who lead you to death, and my favorite, the invisible trip wire that only once you walk over do all the enemies pop out. Cool cut scenes and concepts. Poor game play. But I personally buy it for the multiplayer. The campaign likely takes 6 maybe 8 hours if its like the others? Multiplayer is ongoing. The good outweighs the bad.    … Expand
  33. MasonCooper42
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I haven't completed the single player. but I am enjoying it so far. It will not be to everyone's tastes, but it is still a good game. If you like the previous 5 call of duty games, you will like this one. Mulitplayer has some major issues, parties of more than 2 in multi player have major issues in connecting to games, taking minutes in some cases. Battles seem to be decided by blind luck, as damage seems to be random, as per se sniper rifles are overpowered. example being I came up from a guy left hand side and started shooting him, he had sniper rifle turned, (while being shot) and hip fired, and killed me.

    I'd give it a 8 solid effort, fantastic in places, but same old cod where you need ninja reflexes and ninja esque eyes to scan the entire viewpoint of character and the heat map to know where enemies are. I'd prefer Battlefield 3 to this, but that's just me. The single player is incredibly ott in one of the first missions Soap somehow recovers miracously from a massive stab wound to the chest, to suddenly be fine and dandy, really iw, activision???

    Good game, it is defintely worth the time to play at least once in your lifetime.    … Expand
  34. RoccosRant
    Nov 9, 2011
    8
    I'm really surprised this many pathetic trolls have came by to skew the ratings. So many morons on this site trying to compare it to BF3, you can't, they are almost two completely different games. COD is more fast paced and manic. BF3 is strategic and grand scaled. Neither of these games are bad. MW3 is a COD game, if you like COD, you'll love this game. They have taken everythingI'm really surprised this many pathetic trolls have came by to skew the ratings. So many morons on this site trying to compare it to BF3, you can't, they are almost two completely different games. COD is more fast paced and manic. BF3 is strategic and grand scaled. Neither of these games are bad. MW3 is a COD game, if you like COD, you'll love this game. They have taken everything with MW2 and made it better, not completely different, but still, better. Either get a life and go troll another site or be fair in your assessment. I find it hard to believe even half of these "0 out of 10" posters even played the game.… Expand
  35. sfc89
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    what a disappointment. essentially just a map pack. the survival mode had promise but falls way short of the standard treyarchs zombies set. if you loved mw2, then play mw2. don't go and pay for another copy of it!!
  36. incognito
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Someone said it earlier that this is a map pack for MW2. That person was dead on absolutely nothing new except maps and a few new killstreak rewards. This game is definitely not worth $60 anymore its officially classified as a bargain bin game in my books.
  37. cleggy7
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    The most overhyped piece of trash I've ever played. Every Call of Duty game has been identical since 2007. The developers make very little effort to make the games exciting and this is no exception. If you already have MW2 or any other COD game for that matter, you certainly don't need this. There's absolutely nothing new on offer. Avoid like the plague.
  38. dooder
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    I wish I hadn't purchased this game. I feel ripped off considering all the hype and big name actors in the commercials. I had very little time to watch video's other than trailers and I wish I had. The single player story was pretty good much like all the other MW games. However, the lack of new ideas and improvements is troubling. Much like Oil Companies the makers can do very littleI wish I hadn't purchased this game. I feel ripped off considering all the hype and big name actors in the commercials. I had very little time to watch video's other than trailers and I wish I had. The single player story was pretty good much like all the other MW games. However, the lack of new ideas and improvements is troubling. Much like Oil Companies the makers can do very little to improve and still command big profits. I think this series deserves to be knocked on it's ass in order for them to see that they need to bring more ideas to the table for the next installment.… Expand
  39. iscreamox93
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    its amazing, its clearly alll bf3 fanboys reviewing this, the couple million people that love the game , are too busy playing it to complain. im at school thats why i am , or id be playing it. its amazing, graphics are better, and its smoother, more fun, more in depth, fantastic game! good job IW
  40. Leros
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Same game as every year, the graphics still look as they did in cod 2, the gameplay did not change at all. It's absolutely overpriced, the campaign is too short, there is nothing new in multiplayer.
    Basically it's an overpriced mappack using the name of a great gaming series to milk it to death.
    The story is cheesy and creating explosions in a scripted game is not enough effort to actually    Same game as every year, the graphics still look as they did in cod 2, the gameplay did not change at all. It's absolutely overpriced, the campaign is too short, there is nothing new in multiplayer.
    Basically it's an overpriced mappack using the name of a great gaming series to milk it to death.
    The story is cheesy and creating explosions in a scripted game is not enough effort to actually rate the game based on that.    … Expand
  41. raginmachine
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    I have never played Battlefield, Im a COD and Gears fan, and I'm rating this low because it really is too much the same game as MW2. I mean down to the text and overlays, there is nothing to me that says wow its 2011 and i'm playing MW3. It feels just like 2009 with MW2, I mean exactly the same. I'm glad ppl are angry its has driven me nuts over the years that Madden gets away with theI have never played Battlefield, Im a COD and Gears fan, and I'm rating this low because it really is too much the same game as MW2. I mean down to the text and overlays, there is nothing to me that says wow its 2011 and i'm playing MW3. It feels just like 2009 with MW2, I mean exactly the same. I'm glad ppl are angry its has driven me nuts over the years that Madden gets away with the same thing and no one cares. I mean COD isn't the first franchise to do this, Madden, NBA 2k, Tiger Woods, Even GTA to an extent. Bottom line its up to the consumer, as a developer would you really take major risk in losing fan base by changing a game if you know your going to sell 10 million plus copies with the same formula. I think COD has defined/innovated the FPS market with MW series and ppl should expect them to keep innovating and SHOULD be upset when they don't and should be worried they are turning into madden.… Expand
  42. dumbdarb097
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    Total rehash of an older game that's still running on an outdated engine. It's not even like they tried to hide it either: the main menu is even unchanged! Total lack of effort. Sad to think this is what people expect from an AAA title, rubbish! On the bright side will make a nice down payment on Skyrim come Friday when I trade it in.
  43. tb12
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    Should be called Modern Warfare 2.00001. Graphics are same as they were for MW2, the gun customization and call signs seem smaller and worse than MW2. Maps also seem smaller and uninspired, and there is evidence that they have recycled buildings from previous COD's. Feel like I wasted 60 dollars on what should have been a DLC. I guess i just expected more from it.
  44. jonstuebe
    Nov 9, 2011
    8
    Unlike most others I feel this game can only be fairly reviewed when you consider a couple facts. First the COD franchise comes out with a game every year and because of that you can't expect the same results as the Battlefield franchise which has been working on the same game for years now.

    Singleplayer: If your like me and play through the single player probably a few times while    Unlike most others I feel this game can only be fairly reviewed when you consider a couple facts. First the COD franchise comes out with a game every year and because of that you can't expect the same results as the Battlefield franchise which has been working on the same game for years now.

    Singleplayer:

    If your like me and play through the single player probably a few times while owning it then the cinematic experience is very enjoyable as it is like playing through an interactive movie. Not only is is entertaining but MW3 does things in their singleplayer not done in any previous COD game or other shooter that I have played before (fight in dust storm, a few zero g moments in airplane). Multiplayer:

    I haven't played the multiplayer a ton yet but from everything I'm seeing it seems to be MW2 with different maps slightly different perks and some other modifications. Simply if you enjoy the COD multiplayer style (fast paced, smaller maps), then you'll love it.

    MW3 vs. Battlefield:

    I completely disagree with reviewers that say straight up whether or not MW3 is better or worse than Battlefield. In my opinion, it depends what kind of shooter you prefer. First, do you prefer the realism factor? if so add a point for Battlefield. Next, if you enjoy using vehicles, large maps, and huge teams then add a point for battlefield. However, if you enjoy fast paced shooting where you don't have to crawl around and camp for large portions of the session then MW3 is your game.

    Bottom Line:

    But overall there wasn't a ton of new things, but to me that is expected since like I said earlier they release a game every year. What does piss me off is all of the obvious Battlefield fanboys that jump all over MW3 without realizing that there was no way in hell that they were ever going to like a fast paced shooter with smaller maps and small teams to begin with. Obviously.    … Expand
  45. Ischie
    Nov 9, 2011
    9
    I pre-ordered the game. Traded in my xbox copy of Dark Souls for it at gamestop. Before going to pick up the game I read two pages of user reviews on metacritic. This was going to be my first Call of Duty game and with an overwhelming number
    of negative reviews I wasn't sure if I should get the game or not. From the user reviews here on metacritic, I gathered that people were disappointed    I pre-ordered the game. Traded in my xbox copy of Dark Souls for it at gamestop. Before going to pick up the game I read two pages of user reviews on metacritic. This was going to be my first Call of Duty game and with an overwhelming number
    of negative reviews I wasn't sure if I should get the game or not. From the user reviews here on metacritic, I gathered that people were disappointed because the game looked and played too much like previous games. No one criticized
    previous Call of Duty games for being poor. So, as a first timer to the series, I picked up
    my pre-ordered copy. To me the graphics look great! They don't look dated. And the gameplay is super fun.
    Played multiplayer and spec-ops survival with roommate for hours. I can confidently recommend the game to new comers to the series, specially those who love the fast gameplay of Halo but
    want more depth to their guns and gameplay strategies. The game really does not deserve a 2.5 user score. It deserves a 9 in my opinion. One less than 10 because there's always room for improvement.

    I hope the next Call of Duty game is significantly different from this one otherwise I may feel the way owners of previous Call of Duty games are feeling now. But for new comers, this game's multiplayer is amazing the same way Halo reach's was amazing!

    A definate 9/10 to the multiplayer. Haven't played the single player yet.    … Expand
  46. scholesy
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This game is so bland and unimaginative it actually made me sign up here to write this review. I feel cheated that the developers can justify this being called a new game, when the graphics and gameplay (both single and multiplayer) are identical to Modern Warfare 2. I really feel this is not worth the £40 I paid, and I strongly suggest you consider buying this game, theThis game is so bland and unimaginative it actually made me sign up here to write this review. I feel cheated that the developers can justify this being called a new game, when the graphics and gameplay (both single and multiplayer) are identical to Modern Warfare 2. I really feel this is not worth the £40 I paid, and I strongly suggest you consider buying this game, the critics and reviewers should be ashamed of themselves for giving it such high scores in general when it quite obviously offers nothing new outside of the slightly different campaign and map packs!… Expand
  47. Jcritt31
    Nov 9, 2011
    9
    I watched videos of gameplay before i got the game, and i was scared it was gonna be exactly like MW2. then i saw the user reviews on here and saw that most were hating on this game. then i bought it and played the multiplayer. I immediately got addicted. sure, it is not an amazing game, but it is pretty good. in some ways, yeah its like mw2, but thats how it should be. but in its own wayI watched videos of gameplay before i got the game, and i was scared it was gonna be exactly like MW2. then i saw the user reviews on here and saw that most were hating on this game. then i bought it and played the multiplayer. I immediately got addicted. sure, it is not an amazing game, but it is pretty good. in some ways, yeah its like mw2, but thats how it should be. but in its own way MW3 is its own game. I like it alot and intend to play it alot.… Expand
  48. openingact
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    Have played the COD series since way back in the day when Medal of Honor was the game to play. Review on Online Gameplay: The game play of MW3 is sad. The idea to eliminate sniping has been replaced with an atmosphere of camping. While camping in previous games typically allowed a gamer to get low deaths and moderate amount of kills, while those running could rack up high kills withHave played the COD series since way back in the day when Medal of Honor was the game to play. Review on Online Gameplay: The game play of MW3 is sad. The idea to eliminate sniping has been replaced with an atmosphere of camping. While camping in previous games typically allowed a gamer to get low deaths and moderate amount of kills, while those running could rack up high kills with moderate deaths. Those running in most of these maps end up with only moderate high kills and moderate to high deaths while campers have high kills and low deaths. Guns barely kick and are pretty unreaslistic. While never a fan of newb tubes, the idea that someone can get hit by 2 and not die is ridiculous. I'm going to give it a few days, but I've literally had to force myself to "like" this game, but it's not happening. Graphics are good though.… Expand
  49. Ibjamin
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    I enjoyed playing it. That is what I based my score on. As everyone has said, basically the same as MW2, which is my favorite game. As such I am quite happy. Only complaint would be that I wish the campaign was longer.
  50. Toccoa
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    I am hesitant to give this game a 1 even. The reason being is that the multiplayer is entirely too comparable to Black Ops. The mechanics of the game (fluidity of movement, speed of movement and animations, fire rate of weapons) is very similar to Black Ops, when the game should have been more similar to MW3! Another complaint I have is terrible respawn locations and the poorly designedI am hesitant to give this game a 1 even. The reason being is that the multiplayer is entirely too comparable to Black Ops. The mechanics of the game (fluidity of movement, speed of movement and animations, fire rate of weapons) is very similar to Black Ops, when the game should have been more similar to MW3! Another complaint I have is terrible respawn locations and the poorly designed maps. I read that Sledgehammer wanted to limit camping and promote quick action after respawning, however, the design of the game now hinders teamwork. And don't even think about sniping, there's almost no incentive to attempt stealth or cooperation.… Expand
  51. hitman1398
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    damn i meant to put the rating at a 4. and for the most part i would give it a lower score but that would be out of how pissed I'm on how crappy this game is. If I used my emotions with the rating i would give it a 1 to show how bad the chopped and pasted the game and charged $60. And sorry to everybody for me giving the game a ten. had no plans on doing that but this is my first timedamn i meant to put the rating at a 4. and for the most part i would give it a lower score but that would be out of how pissed I'm on how crappy this game is. If I used my emotions with the rating i would give it a 1 to show how bad the chopped and pasted the game and charged $60. And sorry to everybody for me giving the game a ten. had no plans on doing that but this is my first time commenting on this website and forgot to move the scale. Is there anybody out there that can tell me how to change the rating for a comment I already submitted?… Expand
  52. SkipperPenguin
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Bait and switch...originally, ads said; pre-order and get 1 year of Elite for free...when I picked up my pre-order...I got zilch...not even a freaking poster. Are you kidding me? Every game rewards pre-orders...MW3 gave me nothing. As for gameplay...its a $60 map pack for MW2. In this economy, games should get better, not stale. MW3 feels like an old game with some spit and polish. NotBait and switch...originally, ads said; pre-order and get 1 year of Elite for free...when I picked up my pre-order...I got zilch...not even a freaking poster. Are you kidding me? Every game rewards pre-orders...MW3 gave me nothing. As for gameplay...its a $60 map pack for MW2. In this economy, games should get better, not stale. MW3 feels like an old game with some spit and polish. Not worth the money at all. I'll trade this in and keep Black Ops.… Expand
  53. TheRickster
    Nov 9, 2011
    5
    Single Player Campaign Review only:

    The Modern Warfare story arc was for me, very good. So I was eagerly awaiting the release of Modern Warfare 3 to see how the entire series would be wrapped up. I picked up my copy yesterday and prepared for a good 5 to 6 hours of game play. 3.5 hours later the campaign was over. While MW3 wraps up the story arc nicely it, the game was just way too    Single Player Campaign Review only:

    The Modern Warfare story arc was for me, very good. So I was eagerly awaiting the release of Modern Warfare 3 to see how the entire series would be wrapped up. I picked up my copy yesterday and prepared for a good 5 to 6 hours of game play. 3.5 hours later the campaign was over. While MW3 wraps up the story arc nicely it, the game was just way too short. The originality is gone. It seems that the departure of the key figureheads at Infinity Ward inspired panic throughout the company, and I am going to guess that also stalled development of MW3 for months. So what we get is a game that feels as though it was rushed out the door. The "oh **** we only have a year to get this game out of the door is evident in the game design. All of the ideas it seems from past iterations of the Call of Duty franchise's are used. There were times in the game that I got game play deja vu after slogging through the campaign. When that deja vu did come (and it happened quite often) I was thinking, "I have done this before in some other CoD game." Overall the Modern Warfare campaign wraps up nicely, the shooting is top notch, but I can't shake the feeling that paying $59.99 for a game with a 3.5 hour campaign was too much money.    … Expand
  54. grumpy31
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Well I saw gameplay of the online and genuinely thought it was Modern Warfare 2 on Overgrown. The menus, textures, architecture point pop-ups and HUD are exactly the same as Modern Warfare 2. The guns, perks, kill streaks and sounds have been shaken up slightly in an attempt to keep it fresh.
    The campaign looks to be sleep inducing, there seems to be no events made to be touching or make    Well I saw gameplay of the online and genuinely thought it was Modern Warfare 2 on Overgrown. The menus, textures, architecture point pop-ups and HUD are exactly the same as Modern Warfare 2. The guns, perks, kill streaks and sounds have been shaken up slightly in an attempt to keep it fresh.
    The campaign looks to be sleep inducing, there seems to be no events made to be touching or make you think deeper. Ask anyone who has played a previous installment, they will agree it's basically MW2 DLC put onto a disc.

    Yes it will keep you entertained for some hours but try to put off buying this stale milk left for dead series, maybe steal a copy.    … Expand
  55. AMuffinMassacre
    Nov 9, 2011
    6
    I have always enjoyed the Modern Warfare series. But even though it was clear that Infinity Ward was just making this to put a vacuum to our wallets again, I was still willing to look past that and enjoy this game. I knew I would be a little disappointed by the lack of graphical improvement, but to my surprise the thing that was most disappointing was the maps. I remember I always had myI have always enjoyed the Modern Warfare series. But even though it was clear that Infinity Ward was just making this to put a vacuum to our wallets again, I was still willing to look past that and enjoy this game. I knew I would be a little disappointed by the lack of graphical improvement, but to my surprise the thing that was most disappointing was the maps. I remember I always had my favorite maps in the other Modern Warfare entries, but playing this one I don't have that feeling of "Yes!!! I love this map!". I don't have a single map I look forward too. It seems like they designed by the team who made the black ops maps (which is obviously a negative comparison). The maps don't have that sense of balance that MW2 had, these maps almost encourage corner camping with their design. The gun play I really do enjoy, but what good is gun play when the map you are shooting your guns on is just a cluster f*%$ of poor level choke points, elevation, and poor spawning. I have had over 10 games where I have been spawn camped by the other team, had people spawn directly behind me or in front of me, or been spawned right by the guy who just killed me. I'm sure the spawning can be patched, but maps can't be. Not everything in the game is bad though, the guns, perks, and attachments are still enjoyable if a little stale.… Expand
  56. Gunna
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    You must be kidding, Activision!
    First I was not sure if I play MW2 instead MW3.
    Why? Due to the AI and the Graphic! Both are really bad! I´m not a Battlefield Fan boy, but sorry look at the graphic of MW3 and than look at the graphic of BF3. If you see BF3 you think Mw3 released 3 years ago! Of course the campaign seems to be nearly the same as in Mw2... Maybe the multiplayer    You must be kidding, Activision!
    First I was not sure if I play MW2 instead MW3.
    Why?
    Due to the AI and the Graphic! Both are really bad!
    I´m not a Battlefield Fan boy, but sorry look at the graphic of MW3 and than look at the graphic of BF3. If you see BF3 you think Mw3 released 3 years ago!
    Of course the campaign seems to be nearly the same as in Mw2...
    Maybe the multiplayer will be a little more fun, but i guess it will disappoint me like the rest of the game...
    I really can not understand why all Critic Reviews are that good, maybe the tester just love mw2 and want to play the same again - for 60$ with a new cover...    … Expand
  57. thisismyopinion
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Modern Warfare 3 is a reskin of MW2 which rehashes the same gameplay yet again with the bare minimum of innovation the developer can get away with, though really should be 'developers' as three developers, the dreggs of Infinity Ward, Sledgehammer Games and Raven Software, were needed to knock out this sequel in their less than 18 month development period.

    The campaign took me 4 hours and    Modern Warfare 3 is a reskin of MW2 which rehashes the same gameplay yet again with the bare minimum of innovation the developer can get away with, though really should be 'developers' as three developers, the dreggs of Infinity Ward, Sledgehammer Games and Raven Software, were needed to knock out this sequel in their less than 18 month development period.

    The campaign took me 4 hours and 40 minutes on Regular difficulty, I took my time loking for hidden intel of which I collected 22 of the 46 pieces, it's the shortest Call of Duty campaign yet and the shortest FPS campaign I've certainly ever played. It's full of impressive set pieces with buildings falling down around the player's linear path, but these superficial big budget set pieces barely hide to anyone with experience with MW or MW2 that so much content from them is recycled with just a few minor edits made to the textures to fool the player into thinking what they're seeing is new (case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5dsOn06w1s - an entire building from CoD4), this goes for character models, animations, weapons, vehicles, gameplay sequences (for example the boat secion in MW2), a huge amount of content is reused and the game seems to be built around what they could recycle more than what they could create from scratch. The lack of originality or even intention to be original is present throughout the entire game. The story itself is actually quite enjoyable and feels as much a sequel to CoD4 and MW2, making it tie together nicely as a trilogy, though some sections make it feel more like a fanfic than a true sequel (considering that most of the people who worked on MW2 left and had nothing to do with MW3), the last mission was more of a QTE filled joke than a satisfying conclusion. I wonder how different it would've turned out had 40 of the key staff from IW, the original and only true CoD developer, due to Activision's disgusting treatment of the series, the staff and their creation. I won't even go to the clunkily added controversial scene involving the death of a random child that felt tacked on or the fact that everyone the player kills in the campaign is either African or Russian.

    Spec Ops is a mixed bag, the missions are a mix of fun and terrible, and the Veteran difficulty is like that of the campaign, a very lazily added hard difficulty where the player dies to psychic enemies in around 3 bullets, usually within a second of peeking out from cover (and by peeking I mean moving, as there is still no lean function). The survival mode however is a lot of fun, it works well as two player co-op and a lot of the tedium from the other survival mode in the series, Zombies, is removed by taking out the luck factor with the amount of ammo the player can get and which weapons they acquire. There's a lot of fun to be had here with a friend and it runs smoothly online, the same can't be said for the multiplayer though.

    In the previous Call of Duty, Black Ops, quickscoping was removed on the basis it's a cheap exploit of the game's aim assist, and that was a good call, though it annoyed many kids who like to do it in MW2. They brought this back in MW3 to please those kids and without regard for the quality of their game's online, this sums up their approach to the multiplayer. As a reskin of MW2 it of course plays quite similarly, they've made attempts to better balance the game with how effective the knife, grenade launchers and killstreak rewards are (which amongst quickscoping ranked as the biggest complaints of MW2's multiplayer) and the new point streak system is a nice addition, but all of the technical problems with this peer hosted, laggy mess with poor hit detection and terrible matchmaking still remain, taking a lot of the fun out of playing it, along of course with the huge focus on player's stats (made worse by in-depth stat tracking) that has most players approaching the game in as cheap a way as possible to camp themselves to a high kill/death ratio. The new game modes aren't actually to original either, some of them may as well credit other older and more recent games considering they're so close to them in design. The map design itself is a campfest, designed by Raven Software as after the majority of IW including all its creative and technical talent it took the few left at IW and other Activision developer Slegehammer Games to design the bulk of the game and they needed help fitting map design into their tight schedule, as of course a Call of Duty has to be out every single Novemeber in order to monopolise on the Christmas sales.

    Lazily made rehash that might as well urinate on the grave of the original Infinity Ward, Activision's approach to this franchise is a good representation of everything that's wrong with the game industry right now.

    JM    … Expand
  58. J-P-M
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    wow it's funny how far a terrible game can get with money. Titles like these are what ruin the gaming experience for 80% of people. What happens to the online of every other incredible game... it gets abandoned for this silly excuse for a AAA title ROFLCOPTER and this is suppose to be the BF3 killer hahaha!!! =]
  59. AlandisN
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    Don't believe these haters. They're judging the game in relation to other CoD games. The game ITSELF is STILL AMAZING, hence why the critical review is staying golden. It is a lot like CoD4 and MW2, but that's a GOOD thing because those games were EXCELLENT. If it isn't broke, don't fix it. The new play styles are fun, but the core tdm experience is competitive and enjoyable. Less glitchyDon't believe these haters. They're judging the game in relation to other CoD games. The game ITSELF is STILL AMAZING, hence why the critical review is staying golden. It is a lot like CoD4 and MW2, but that's a GOOD thing because those games were EXCELLENT. If it isn't broke, don't fix it. The new play styles are fun, but the core tdm experience is competitive and enjoyable. Less glitchy than MW2 as well. If you enjoyed the other MW's, you'll love this one too.… Expand
  60. Deitri
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This game uses the same engine as Modern Warfare 2, doesn't show us anything new, the campaign is patethic, boring and way too easy, the multiplayer is more of the same (as I said already). Also, there will be alot of DLCs.
    Incredible, this game is probably the worst ever.
  61. patjc
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This is the same game as last year, its all been downhill since COD4. Its good to see that people finally realise that the series has had its best days behind it now. Go buy Skyrim, it will be good for the next five years. Unlike this iteration of COD. Prepare for the same tired formula next year. Unless they actually innovate a bit
  62. skatzman
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    It is almost as if IW paid every single critic to give a positive review....what a joke that critics are rating this game so high. I wish they were right....I am so disappointed by this game after such a huge and exciting build-up
  63. MadDogHoek23
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    I work at a retail store and sell games, and before MW3 came out everybody would ask me if I played it yet and my response was always" Yup, I played it last year, the year before that and the year before that." Now that it's out and I've played it, I stand by my comment.
  64. djbooks
    Nov 9, 2011
    5
    ....and here is where I come in. I play Halo. The biggest difference between Halo and the Call of Duty series is, imo, Halo is more arcade and Call of Duty is more simulation. Have I played MWF3? Yes and it really is more of the same...imo. Another difference between the two is that my game doesn't ship EVERY YEAR, which may be why your game is more of the same. Here's an analogy...your....and here is where I come in. I play Halo. The biggest difference between Halo and the Call of Duty series is, imo, Halo is more arcade and Call of Duty is more simulation. Have I played MWF3? Yes and it really is more of the same...imo. Another difference between the two is that my game doesn't ship EVERY YEAR, which may be why your game is more of the same. Here's an analogy...your publisher and developers are just regular USDA Beef, while my publisher and developer is like Kobe Beef...finessed, well fed, groomed and NOT RUSHED TO THE TABLE!… Expand
  65. lms44
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    Same old, same old. Expected nothing special and that is exactly what I got. This is pretty much a map pack for MW2. I guess I can see that fanbois don't like their cheese moved but for me its an amazing ripoff by Activision.
  66. Gordein
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    To begin with, that I bought all releases of this series of games, and each new made â
  67. PickleStiff
    Nov 9, 2011
    6
    I think Im done with the COD series. My biggest grip is the maps, after playing BF3 these maps feel like tiny mazes and there is no strategy except for run in circles and shoot. The single player is pretty good, I dont care what others are saying the graphics are excellent just like the previous titles but the guns sound like crap. MW 1 and 2 to me are two of the best games in history butI think Im done with the COD series. My biggest grip is the maps, after playing BF3 these maps feel like tiny mazes and there is no strategy except for run in circles and shoot. The single player is pretty good, I dont care what others are saying the graphics are excellent just like the previous titles but the guns sound like crap. MW 1 and 2 to me are two of the best games in history but 3 is not even close. The online maps are truly frustrating, I played for 4 hours and every map felt like I was constantly getting shot from behind.
    I noticed they still haven't found a cure for the lag problem too. Too many times I would go down with one shot to the body while I fired off 2 or 3. I dont know how they managed to make these maps so small but yet so confusing with no breaks, the previous games had a variety of wide open to close quarter combat, this one is all the same mess. I'm going back to BF3 tonight,, after playing both these titles back to back BF3 is hands down a better game. When I'm tired of BF3 I will go back to MW2 which was the last great game of the series.    … Expand
  68. BigDaveBlue
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    Don't believe the haters. If you liked MW2, which was ace, then you'll love this. Story continues where MW2 leaves off and delivers more of the same epic modern warfare we've come to love.

    Multiplayer has massively improved this time around and lots of new co-op goodness as well.

    More of the same in 2 years please IW.
  69. SJitz11
    Nov 9, 2011
    8
    The franchise is COD..... gameplay and style has been the same since Adam and Eve.
    Same old multiplayer.............
    I didn't expect it to change......cos its COD.....Ridiculous Veteran AI that pull off insanely accurate kills, grenade spamming like its going out of fashion, stupid friendly AI that always take up your cover position..... but once you finish the campaign you get a    The franchise is COD..... gameplay and style has been the same since Adam and Eve.
    Same old multiplayer.............
    I didn't expect it to change......cos its COD.....Ridiculous Veteran AI that pull off insanely accurate kills, grenade spamming like its going out of fashion, stupid friendly AI that always take up your cover position..... but once you finish the campaign you get a feeling of accomplishment. sense of having some sort of skill to beat the game on hardest. spec ops cool too. multiplayer is not mind blowing.... Bottom line though .....................it is FUN to play 8/10    … Expand
  70. Joeyride
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    a bunch of followers and twelve year old kids thinking their cool. such a gay game... it would be a good game if it was the first cod ever, nothing like BF3 of course but wow its lack of vehicles and destruction is depressing
  71. asneakyfatcat
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    I don't have words to describe the lack of effort put into this game, but I will try. Activision managed to recycle all of the structures and assets from previous games like it is some kind of virtual garbage dump. The engine is the exact same as Modern Warfare 2, they were so busy laughing to the bank that they even forgot to change the crash messege on the PC from MW2 to MW3. ThisI don't have words to describe the lack of effort put into this game, but I will try. Activision managed to recycle all of the structures and assets from previous games like it is some kind of virtual garbage dump. The engine is the exact same as Modern Warfare 2, they were so busy laughing to the bank that they even forgot to change the crash messege on the PC from MW2 to MW3. This game was not made for gamers, its only purpose is making a profit and creating brainwashed fanboys by churning out a game every 6 months so they do not have time to think. The critics clearly have not played the other games, or activision paid them off for good reviews. And don't even get me started ob the story *shudders*. The storyline is the same in every game, with no creativity or effort, and it is five gruling hours. This game is basicly a $60 map pack for MW2 (I loved that game, but after black op's came out I began to see the big picture). I would rather ride a public detroit buss around for 5 hours instead of playing this abomination, hell I would rather grind this game up and snort it instead of playing this game, at least a trip to the hospital will be exciting. Do yourself a favor, save your money and go buy a game that is worth your money such as used copy of MW1 or MW2, mass effect 1+2, skyrim, Ect. Oh, did I mention that that was only the single player? Don't even get my started about all the butthurt racist 12 year olds that you will be playing with, and all the extreme to the max try hard's. Im not even going to mention the small cramped maps and the spawning problems, it makes me feel like I am homeless and living in a cardboard box, from which I cannot escape. Also Soap and all the main charecters die (there I just saved you 5 hours of pain and suffering).… Expand
  72. Seba
    Nov 9, 2011
    9
    People need to learn to stop complaining that it is the "Same game". It is not, and the things that are the same were kept because THEY WORKED! This game is fast paced just like mw2 and they did that on purpose, because they did not want to change the flow of the game. This is much more balanced than all other COD's and the new point streak system works. The only complaint I really have isPeople need to learn to stop complaining that it is the "Same game". It is not, and the things that are the same were kept because THEY WORKED! This game is fast paced just like mw2 and they did that on purpose, because they did not want to change the flow of the game. This is much more balanced than all other COD's and the new point streak system works. The only complaint I really have is that the Support streak can be overpowered since it does not reset upon death.… Expand
  73. Aya
    Nov 9, 2011
    9
    This is still the best shooter around and this time it feels more like the adrenaline that came with MW2 and Infinity ward's greatness. I don't understand all the haters out there. The multiplayer can be difficult against a clan, but at least you're not getting poned every two seconds like in Battlefield and the campaign isn't a linear amateur hour sh*tshow.
  74. Vll
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Been playing for five hours. I'm sure they will respond by making a brilliant innovative game next time, but with this release COD has got stale for mine
  75. The_Gooser
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    This DLC is way overpriced, a crap campaign and a few new maps and weapons does not deserve a $60 price tag. Nothing has changed in the way of gameplay or looks, all they did was switch around a few ways to get perks/kill streaks and called it a day. All of the sound effects, animations, models, textures, and story have been rehashed, this is a clear indication of company that has trulyThis DLC is way overpriced, a crap campaign and a few new maps and weapons does not deserve a $60 price tag. Nothing has changed in the way of gameplay or looks, all they did was switch around a few ways to get perks/kill streaks and called it a day. All of the sound effects, animations, models, textures, and story have been rehashed, this is a clear indication of company that has truly lost it's will to create and be imaginative. Wait, we have a new game mode "Kill Confirmed", it seemed interesting, but I was reminded as to how boring this game is. Crappy FPS shooters are killing the game industry, an industry that now survives on long drawn out franchises and **** on true creativity and innovation.

    Anyways don't bother with this game or any other shooter that releases every year. That is right, good ole' Activision has already said that we should expect a new Call of Duty next year, they release this statement on the same day the darn game released.. They have taken a **** on us and continue to release poo from their bloated **** and we are expected to just stand there and take it. Not anymore, this **** covered gamer is taking a shower and is going to resist the urge to purchase another sub-par shooter.    … Expand
  76. Gofure
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Why is this game getting such high reviews from critics I will never know. This is the SAME GAME as Modern Warfare. Having a new CoD every damn year really lowers the quality of the games overall. Some people are saying that CoD stays the same because it works, but companies usually try to IMPROVE upon something that works, not re-release the same thing every year and expect people to payWhy is this game getting such high reviews from critics I will never know. This is the SAME GAME as Modern Warfare. Having a new CoD every damn year really lowers the quality of the games overall. Some people are saying that CoD stays the same because it works, but companies usually try to IMPROVE upon something that works, not re-release the same thing every year and expect people to pay full price. Save your money for something else, just add a 3 to the end of your Modern Warfare box for the same result.… Expand
  77. 247Consoles
    Nov 9, 2011
    8
    After a week of soaking up the game in it's entirety, I find it very hard to give a review score for a game that is split into 2 very different parts.

    Part 1 Campaign. For me, this was extremely good. I had zero disc graphics lag and the game ran very smooth, reminded me of a stripped back version of MW2 which most COD4 fans would adore. The waves of opposition came at a good rate, with    After a week of soaking up the game in it's entirety, I find it very hard to give a review score for a game that is split into 2 very different parts.

    Part 1 Campaign.

    For me, this was extremely good. I had zero disc graphics lag and the game ran very smooth, reminded me of a stripped back version of MW2 which most COD4 fans would adore. The waves of opposition came at a good rate, with the odd cheeky guy waiting to pounce to catch you off guard, to help it look less linear. The target hits was somewhat off, but another burst of fire made me forget that, unlike BF3.

    The ending was nicely dramatised and left me feeling like I had achieved 'THE END' which gave me hell at the point where I switched elevator's in a sweet little jump. I found the roomful of guys extremely hard to beat until I realised the tactic was to hold back in the lift foyer. Nice all-round game I thought.

    Part 2 MultiPlayer.

    Started off quite well, I played it for approx 1 hour before the servers were closed on Wednesday 2nd Nov for a while. I jumped back onto it on saturday 5th Nov for a good old gaming session, which once again seemed really great, plus I love the set-up of 99% of the new maps.

    It all started to go slightly sour for me online at approx 7pm when I had difficulty killing people who weren't even shooting back, then would turn around and 1 or 2 shot me. I was wondering why the transformation had occured and put it down to my quite impressive connection of 100mb, but it simply kept happening even as far as the 8th Nov.

    It seems there is the usual graphical 'hold-back' whereby anyone on a great connection can't see the opposition as fast as they should be able to, to 'even' the broadband speeds up. OH how wrong they have got this side of the game. Same as BlackOps.

    When are the people in charge of latency going to realise that those with higher spec broadband, have paid for this to improve their gameplay, not to be used as a server, not to be killed by a guy who I am shooting who is currently facing the other way till he see's my bullets pass through him, turns round and 1 shot kills me stone dead. This is classed as gameplay interference and should be cut dead from the activision servers RIGHT NOW. You are targeting high end broadband or uniquely good killers, in favour of 3mb broadband or noob users, which I cannot stress enough, is ruining the fundamentals of the game for these, the most dedicated of your users.

    The game has outsold BOPS and based on the campaign I know it is better, same MW2, but the online is where most players will travel and even though the campaign deserves a 9 the online deserves a 5.

    Sort out the online and I will give you a 10 next time - but don't cheat the system, cut the bull and stop lagging out the high-end user. He is the guy with the money BTW. You are using an archaic system on this side of the fence which does not work in the UK half as well as you may have planned. In short - SORT YOUR MESS OUT!    … Expand
  78. shadow822
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Appalled by review scores. Battlefield gets ripped on the fact that they added a singleplayer mode to what is essentially a multiplayer only game, just as an addition to add value to the game, yet Activision gets away with this crap every year. It's all about the money, and they're making a lot of it.
  79. Eralyax
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This game is a big joke! 60â
  80. medorbust12
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    It's incredibly original and the story line is just amazing...I'm of course kidding. Please bring me something original in a modern age fps. Just shows that a whole bunch of money doesn't mean you will produce anything decent. Time to start looking at Half-Life 3 conspiracy forums again, lol.
  81. xEaZYx
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    We have all played or at least seen all these recycled Call of Duty Games. They are only making money by the popularity, not the actual game itself. See guys, Activision pays many many many reviewers to go and write 5 star reviews for this trash, when in reality these reviewers most likely wont even buy the game themselves. Just think about it, activison has all this money, Now they're notWe have all played or at least seen all these recycled Call of Duty Games. They are only making money by the popularity, not the actual game itself. See guys, Activision pays many many many reviewers to go and write 5 star reviews for this trash, when in reality these reviewers most likely wont even buy the game themselves. Just think about it, activison has all this money, Now they're not just going to wipe their *** with it, (well maybe) but anyway they are going use it to get better reviews, so they can make even more money. now getting to the game itself. this game..........is basicly exactly the same as MW2. For example, the graphics and gameplay are EXACTLY the same as MW2. dissapointing. the only thing that was changed was the killstreak rewards and maps. and get this, the maps are even worse than they before. very small and maze like garbage. another great dissapointment. If you made the mistake of buying this trash, i HIGHLY, 100% recommend selling it back in to get BF3. BF3 is a great game that deserves real 4.5 to 5 star reviews.In BF3 the graphics are better, the gameplay is better, its MUCH more realistic. theres a Huge selection of weaponry and vehicles. Hey guess what? in BF3 theres none of those little 10 year old campers that dont have the skill to get on their feet and actually get real kills, because if there is one, you blow the whole freakin building down on them. the maps are also MASSIVE in BF3, but MW3, no the maps are tiny and terrible. When i played the beta in BF3, it was all glitchy but still fun, but then i played the real game, it was amazing. they fixed everything. well thats my comparison, this review is based mostly off of facts not opinions. so take this review into consideration and GO GET YOUR MONEY BACK!!!… Expand
  82. Goodfolk
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    Call of Duty MW 2.5 - thats the real name of this game. same game another 60$
    you get a new story WOW but after you play it over and over, you want to enjoy some Multi action and then you get MW 2 all over again..

    GREAT STUFF ACTMONEY

    the 2 points go to the single..
  83. ccmclaugh
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    I will confess up front: I'm a COD fanboy. I've liked every iteration of the game up until now. Sure, none of the previous titles were perfect. But one could nevertheless have a great deal of fun, playing with a variety of gametypes and playstyles. MW3 is not like that AT ALL. It's made exclusively for run-n-gun gameplay. The maps are all tiny and maze-like and you find yourself constantlyI will confess up front: I'm a COD fanboy. I've liked every iteration of the game up until now. Sure, none of the previous titles were perfect. But one could nevertheless have a great deal of fun, playing with a variety of gametypes and playstyles. MW3 is not like that AT ALL. It's made exclusively for run-n-gun gameplay. The maps are all tiny and maze-like and you find yourself constantly spawning behind the enemy or the enemy spawning behind you. This makes my favorite loadout, the sniper, completely useless. If you're not using an SMG or a shotgun and taking your chances at spawn/die/spawn/die suicide runs, then you're not going to get anywhere in this game. And who can play that way for more than 20 minutes without getting fatigued? Add in the poor framerate, poor support for dedicated servers, poor graphics, and so on, and this game fails mightily compared to the others. If you haven't purchased it yet, don't buy it. And if you do feel compelled to buy it, wait until it goes on sale. I hope single player is better because I feel like I wasted $60.… Expand
  84. JaccoPacco
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    MW2: Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V, what do you get? MW3

    Really, when will Infinity Ward learn? This "game" is a joke. Singleplayer is horrible (especially the cheesy story), Spec Ops is just a copy of other game modes from other games, and multiplayer is average as usual. Even the little improvements and innovation that Black Ops had (Wager matches, Currency system, Diving, etc.) are all thrown out    MW2: Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V, what do you get? MW3

    Really, when will Infinity Ward learn? This "game" is a joke. Singleplayer is horrible (especially the cheesy story), Spec Ops is just a copy of other game modes from other games, and multiplayer is average as usual. Even the little improvements and innovation that Black Ops had (Wager matches, Currency system, Diving, etc.) are all thrown out of the window.

    Rent this game if you're interested in Spec Ops, but that's it.    … Expand
  85. TurboMonkey
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Wow. I can understand a game like Fifa, which is simply trying to simulate a simple concept of 22 men kicking a ball around a field only making marginal improvements year on year, its not like they've got license to change the rules of the game. This is not the case with COD. It can do whatever it likes, leap from time zone to time zone, country to country - limited only by the dev team'sWow. I can understand a game like Fifa, which is simply trying to simulate a simple concept of 22 men kicking a ball around a field only making marginal improvements year on year, its not like they've got license to change the rules of the game. This is not the case with COD. It can do whatever it likes, leap from time zone to time zone, country to country - limited only by the dev team's imagination. Sadly it would appear they don't have one. All the irritating comment bleating about how MW3 was going to be a copy and paste rehash have been proved entirely correct. I'm ashamed to say I bothered to go out at midnight to join the masses and snaffle this up but after 2 days of trying to love it I'll be headed back to BF3 for my fix of variety, freshness, tactics and creativity. Poor show Infinity Ward, you just lost a big fan.… Expand
  86. Jay_Gamer
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    You get what you expect from this one. New maps, weak single player, and the same multiplayer experience you come to expect from the COD series. The spec ops missions are interesting enough the first time through. Barely worth the $60. This could have been released as DLC considering the weak single player. I would suggest in the future keep expanding on the spec ops and perhapsYou get what you expect from this one. New maps, weak single player, and the same multiplayer experience you come to expect from the COD series. The spec ops missions are interesting enough the first time through. Barely worth the $60. This could have been released as DLC considering the weak single player. I would suggest in the future keep expanding on the spec ops and perhaps expand to four players? Survival mode is a good addition....just zombies that was "re-gifted"...but I will take it. I couldnt give it a 10 because there is nothing that makes it amazing. I couldnt give it a 0 because there are new maps and spec ops is good...only below average because there is no richness to the game whatsoever. I spent my hard earned money...took the chance...not a total loss...buy it and make up your own mind...… Expand
  87. weedlord
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This game is awful. When it crashes or you change your display settings, it gets referred to as Modern Warfare 2 by the game. This is what it is. Terrible DLC for MW2 using terrible reused assets and terrible uncontrollable cutscenes. This game is like 4 hours long at the most and at the end, you wonder where the rest is. Save your money and just get Battlefield 3. Better single player,This game is awful. When it crashes or you change your display settings, it gets referred to as Modern Warfare 2 by the game. This is what it is. Terrible DLC for MW2 using terrible reused assets and terrible uncontrollable cutscenes. This game is like 4 hours long at the most and at the end, you wonder where the rest is. Save your money and just get Battlefield 3. Better single player, better multi player, better game.… Expand
  88. zavor
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    After 600 hours on mw2 i can say this is very similar but slightly better. New modes new weapons. The graphic at 60fps for this generation of conosle is this , they can't do magic. After the disappointment for black ops i think this is a good return of a classic fps.
  89. duluthdude
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    I can not believe how bad this game is. Don't get me wrong if this was 2009 it would be wonderful, but its not. First off the maps are small and uninspired. The graphics have not improved since the first modern warfare. (Black ops was way better visually) And they say they added new features? LMAO What? "survival" All they did was get rid of the zombie make up!!!
  90. fishstick
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    ah, CoD.
    a game i've played since the first one, till the last one.
    i've always loved my CoD, but MW3? no. this is just THE perfect example of the thing what happens when a game becomes more about money, then about fun. I could imagine they think like: Hey! every child is going to get his parents to buy the new Modern warfare, so why not leave it the same? none of them will notice or    ah, CoD.
    a game i've played since the first one, till the last one.
    i've always loved my CoD, but MW3? no. this is just THE perfect example of the thing what happens when a game becomes more about money, then about fun.
    I could imagine they think like: Hey! every child is going to get his parents to buy the new Modern warfare, so why not leave it the same? none of them will notice or complain about it! CoD is a hype!
    this is a huge disappointement to me, and other "veteran" CoD players i know.
    the multiplayer is incredibly "old", it feels like im playing MW1/2 again, while i was hoping for something new, and truly unique to the CoD experience. the Campaign is reaaaally easy and linear, the story has cliches all over it, and the enemy's behave as stupid as ever.
    Also, the graphics are practically the same and the sounds dont sound intense or realistic.

    My CoD times are over,
    I want my 60$ back.    … Expand
  91. kierrin1234
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
    Average User Score: 2.6 User Score 10 all you cod fanboys stop assuming there bf3 fanboys maybe they just hate cod and are sick of a game with no innovation and a game that has not taking a step forward sine cod 4 ive played mw3 for survival mode and going to swap it for skyrim cause its borng and the same as mw2 and i dont play bf3 i couldnt care less    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
    Average User Score: 2.6 User Score 10 all you cod fanboys stop assuming there bf3 fanboys maybe they just hate cod and are sick of a game with no innovation and a game that has not taking a step forward sine cod 4 ive played mw3 for survival mode and going to swap it for skyrim cause its borng and the same as mw2 and i dont play bf3 i couldnt care less about it but i still dont like cod are you going to call me a bf3 fanboy? but cod has brainwashed 25 million people in the world its at least to see people know that its not a good gameâ    … Expand
  92. stockos
    Nov 9, 2011
    2
    When I buy a sequel to a game I expect some sort of major change and do not expect it to be a copy paste of the previous game, that is just what infinity ward and activision did. Modern Warfare 3 (or i should say 2.5) is just a polished version of Modern Warfare 2. It is exactly the same, there is literally no changes to the multiplayer and the single player is mediocre at best. In theWhen I buy a sequel to a game I expect some sort of major change and do not expect it to be a copy paste of the previous game, that is just what infinity ward and activision did. Modern Warfare 3 (or i should say 2.5) is just a polished version of Modern Warfare 2. It is exactly the same, there is literally no changes to the multiplayer and the single player is mediocre at best. In the multiplayer the titles and emblems haven't changed at all and it feels like its just a map pack and gun pack to modern warfare 2. Basically if your looking for a good fps the best way to go is Battlefield 3 or Counter Strike: Global Offense.… Expand
  93. failedagain
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Bad game is bad.

    Why are they chargin £50 for this? The same rehashed crap that was released years ago. £50 for a terrible map pack, not to worry they will release some more packs in a few weeks costs £15.
  94. embracethepain
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    I would be surprised if the developers of BF3 paid people to write bad reviews, I think the game is incredible!

    Although it is similar to MW2, It still includes a range of environments around the world, keeps intensity, adds new features and includes more game-play for offline players. I can only play the campaign once maybe twice for most games before I've had enough. Campaign, Spec    I would be surprised if the developers of BF3 paid people to write bad reviews, I think the game is incredible!

    Although it is similar to MW2, It still includes a range of environments around the world, keeps intensity, adds new features and includes more game-play for offline players. I can only play the campaign once maybe twice for most games before I've had enough. Campaign, Spec Ops, Survival Mode and the online modes make the game well worth the money...

    To the people who say: its simply a MW2 expansion. What were you expecting?! To travel suddenly back into another era? I honestly cant think of how they could have made it better! It's meant to be a intense, fast-paced, FPS; not a battle simulation. Call Of Duty isn't was never about the teamwork or realism per say, its simply meant to be about you playing as a hardcore soldier, doing the impossible... (If you looking for a realistic battle simulation, buy BF3 a realistic but slow paced game. )
    If you don't like fast paced FPS games (e.g. BF3 fan) don't give it bad ratings, if it's not your type then it's not.
    If you liked the MW series, but want more features, better graphics, intense 'point-streak rewards', and want a fairer online experience than the games before; get Call Of Duty Modern Warfare 3    … Expand
  95. IroningBoard
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Sequels used to mean improving and changing the flaws of the previous games. All I see is a game that has been re-released and repackaged with a different title. The sad thing is, is that its flying off the shelves and people are singing its praises. The average user score for this game however gives me hope that people are finally realising that this lazy, incompetent developing is justSequels used to mean improving and changing the flaws of the previous games. All I see is a game that has been re-released and repackaged with a different title. The sad thing is, is that its flying off the shelves and people are singing its praises. The average user score for this game however gives me hope that people are finally realising that this lazy, incompetent developing is just not acceptable.… Expand
  96. MadDad
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Deeply disappointed! I have played most fanchises of Activision who has - unfortunately degenerated to a pur cash generating machine completely neglecting their real clients, the gamers. Modern Warfare 3 is at its best a Modern Warfare 2 1.5. Activision, and this is for sure will not see me again.

    Buy Battlefield 3! Enter war and feel it.
  97. BARSI
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    same cod experience as the last two modern warfares, same storyline same action same buildings....
    http://www.finallevel.co.uk/2011/11/08/infinity-ward-recycle-buildings-on-mw3-straight-from-cod-4/

    also extreamily short single player, finished in one sitting.
  98. CompositeGuy
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    Brilliant game love it. I play games for a laugh and a bit of fun, call of duty brings all of that. Multiplayer is better than ever. The story is fun and is cheesy as ever. I like a game that i can pick up and play for half an hour or five hours. I have bought both MW3 and BF3 and this is by far the best. Makes me laugh how many BF3 fanboys have taken the time out from playing what theyBrilliant game love it. I play games for a laugh and a bit of fun, call of duty brings all of that. Multiplayer is better than ever. The story is fun and is cheesy as ever. I like a game that i can pick up and play for half an hour or five hours. I have bought both MW3 and BF3 and this is by far the best. Makes me laugh how many BF3 fanboys have taken the time out from playing what they call the "better" game to give MW3 a 0. Wow if i had the choice of either playing BF3 or reading and writing comments about MW3 i suppose i would be here with the hundreds of you BF3 fans as it is Rubbish. BF2 was better. Doesnt matter how many 0's you give it will prob be biggest selling game of year and thus most played. 10/10 easily… Expand
  99. ScottosMaximos
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    First things first: I don't buy these games for 'campaign' or 'singleplayer' as I like playing against humans as opposed to bots. And I was actually very disapointed with MW3: The Muiltiplayer maps are all small and not as well thought out as Black ops or MW2 (I know nuketown was popular but only because it was the only small one which reminded people of unreal tournament) and its lessFirst things first: I don't buy these games for 'campaign' or 'singleplayer' as I like playing against humans as opposed to bots. And I was actually very disapointed with MW3: The Muiltiplayer maps are all small and not as well thought out as Black ops or MW2 (I know nuketown was popular but only because it was the only small one which reminded people of unreal tournament) and its less tactical and more constant running. Secondly all the good changes which were made to blackops are lacking (like when you knife someone from behind) or dive! its also a shame thue 'design your own emblem' didn't transfer across from black ops to mw3. The game is lacking is detail of after game stats in things like domination. How many did we capture? and finally, the graphics and realism now appear dated in comparison to Battlefield 3 (which is surprising considering they stole the 'weapon level up' idea from the battlefield games) - destructable landscapes might bave been good!

    IF it wants to be kill kill kill based as opposed to objective based then why didn't it have a gears3 or Halo (Horde) type mode ?! Such a shame!    … Expand
  100. throwawaypl0x
    Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This game... this game is more like an expansion pack than a sequel. Really. So few new features, bland maps, recycled weapons and content, a mildly updated engine from years ago, etc. After seeing what it has to offer, I wouldn't even sell this game for more than $10 as I'd be living with a guilty conscious that I just completely ripped off the buyer. Take a hike MW3, your run in theThis game... this game is more like an expansion pack than a sequel. Really. So few new features, bland maps, recycled weapons and content, a mildly updated engine from years ago, etc. After seeing what it has to offer, I wouldn't even sell this game for more than $10 as I'd be living with a guilty conscious that I just completely ripped off the buyer. Take a hike MW3, your run in the market should have ended long, long ago.… 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 »