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. Tonyisserious
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    I've told myself many times, no game deserves zero. I've played video games since I was an infant, and since being an infant, I've seen the gaming industry go through a revolution. The gaming industry moves faster than in terms of innovation, than any other medium in the WORLD.

    To me, that is amazing. So I'll begin, with saying I did not have to pay money for this game, I borrowed it    I've told myself many times, no game deserves zero. I've played video games since I was an infant, and since being an infant, I've seen the gaming industry go through a revolution. The gaming industry moves faster than in terms of innovation, than any other medium in the WORLD.

    To me, that is amazing.

    So I'll begin, with saying I did not have to pay money for this game, I borrowed it from a friend, so its not like I'am upset that I got ripped off.

    There has only been one game series that I've ever seen before, that completely screwed up every game in their series after the first one. And that game is Halo. Halo one is great game, for us PC fanboys (I used to be) it'll always have a place in our hearts. Then Halo 2 came out, I grabbed that game opening day, and never once in my entire life have I ever been so disappointed by a inanimate object.


    But you know what the difference between Halo, and Call of Duty is?

    Bungie (the company behind Halo) actually tried.

    Bungie actually tried to make a game that would CRUSH, their previous one. And you can see it in every aspect, even if you hate halo 2 and every one after it like I do, you can't help but appreciate the technology they've created, and what they've done.

    We are getting to a point now, where third party gaming companies (those games the mainstream doesn't buy) after innovating more than Activision. And yes, I know Bungie is a developer, and Activision is a producer. But the difference, is that Bungie's producer tells them "Make a great game", Activision tells their developers "It releases next november".

    So you can't help but assume the game it already going to be terrible. But no matter I gave it a chance.
    I myself am I fan of multiplayer, I hate single player everything, so for the benefit of the score of this game, I will not rate the single player. In my opinion, if you are buying this game for the single player, you need psychological help.

    Anyways, lets take a look.
    MAPS:
    Okay, so in standard call of duty fashion, excluding Call of Duty 4 all the maps are designed in a "circle" fashion. Which means that all the players are basically running around the map in a circle all the time.

    What does this mean for gameplay? It means that no matter what your style is, you will get shot in the back, all the time. Not only that, but the cover is completely useless being that the guns do not have any recoil. Even if you can't be seen by your enemy, they can easily shoot you through a wall.

    Not only that, but I don't know if this has been a common problem. But probably one of my biggest pet peeves in a game, is giving me the option of spawning into the game, I press that button, and guess what happens? I die.

    Its extremely easy to figure out the spawns, and sit in a position where you can spawn kill all match.

    Thats called poor design, and the only difference between this game and Call of duty 4, is some guns have recoil in cod4, and some of the maps are designed so you aren't continuously shot in the back (though not all).

    GAMEPLAY:
    Oh god, can we skip this one? NO?!

    Basically here is what makes Call of duty so addictive, here is why people buy it, and if you like the sound of this, YOU SHOULD BUY THIS GAME. Not rent, you should buy. You will love it I promise.

    Best feature about call of duty (in my opinion) is turning on your system of choice, and getting into a game as fast as your system turned on.

    But as soon as I notice this great feature, I just as quickly realize my most hated part of a call of duty game.
    The gameplay.

    Its designed, the sprinting, the movement, the recoil on the weapons, the attachment for the weapons, how much it takes for you to die; this is all designed you make you feel like you are the in game version of Jesus Christ.

    Let me explain;

    Now lets say, you are absolutely TERRIBLE at first person shooters, call of duty is a perfect first stop IF you know nothing about video games, and what it means to put care into a game. You will do GREAT in call of duty, you will be SO proud of yourself, want to know why?

    Because of the poor map design, followed by all those things above, you will no matter what enter a scenario, where you will slaughter your enemies, in what way exactly I have no idea. But you will do so well for just a brief 10 seconds, and that for most people is reward enough.

    SOUND: **** just **** sorry. They have so much money they can afford the biggest names to make an INSANE soundtrack. Not only that, in not one single call of duty game in the history of call of duty have they ever used real gun sounds for all the guns. Meaning you have an MP5k, that actually makes the sound of an FN P90. Which for most, who cares? But for gun dorks like me, its a big deal. GRAPHICS: Call of duty 4? HOW OLD IS THAT GAME, WHY USE THE SAME ENGINE?! INNOVATION: I made this last category as a punchline for my Review.    … Expand
  2. moveslikeheskey
    Nov 20, 2011
    5
    Nothing special with this game here. The single player campaign was good, for the most part. The plot seemed to move well and fill in the holes to complete the Modern Warfare series. However, like the majority, this game is rated on multiplayer. I spent many hours playing Modern Warfare 2, and all bugs, exploits, and glitches aside, it played and handled well. With Black Ops, the game feltNothing special with this game here. The single player campaign was good, for the most part. The plot seemed to move well and fill in the holes to complete the Modern Warfare series. However, like the majority, this game is rated on multiplayer. I spent many hours playing Modern Warfare 2, and all bugs, exploits, and glitches aside, it played and handled well. With Black Ops, the game felt more balanced, but the horrendous lag and bad hit detection really took away from that experience. In that instance, I felt Black Ops was a step back. However, after playing Modern Warfare 3, it's more like a complete jump back. The first glaring problem is the lag is worse than Black Ops. I've literally lost count of the number of time I have shot at enemies, have them turn, and be killed in one quick shot. Players jump around maps, freezing, shots not registering, etc. These are simple mechanics that worked well in MW2 and seem to be broken in MW3. Apart from the lag and hit detection problems, the spawn system is terrible. This can at least be fixed, but it just screams poor programming when something so trivial and basic has major problems. The formula for Call of Duty is simple and proven. However, whether it be rushed deadlines or just poor finishing, Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer Games (a cringe-worthy name of a studio) seem to have lost the vision that the Modern Warfare series once had. CoD4 and MW2 are some of my favourite games ever. However, MW3 seems to have set the series back. This game is average and honestly not worth the praise and revenue it has received. When compared to the other big FPS game, Battlefield 3, MW3 is a distant second place.… Expand
  3. CAPTAIN_DACADO
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    Like most user's come to comment... unfortunatley modern warfare 3 doesn't differ much from its prequal modern warfare 2... regarding innovation through the campaign or multiplayer aspect. though the game is enhanced with a new gameplay of survival... which borders kinda along the line of zombies from treyarchs black ops series. no doubt you will waste alot of hours playing modern warfare,Like most user's come to comment... unfortunatley modern warfare 3 doesn't differ much from its prequal modern warfare 2... regarding innovation through the campaign or multiplayer aspect. though the game is enhanced with a new gameplay of survival... which borders kinda along the line of zombies from treyarchs black ops series. no doubt you will waste alot of hours playing modern warfare, and not all will fill totally disappointed with the outcome... but for me personally the one thing that made this game average, was the lack of system link and being able to cram rooms of competitive friend together without needing to fall victim to a great marketing scam of having to be online... what ever happened to lan gaming and getting together to pown your friend arse...? ok so system link is possible but due to pure laziness of programming or even conflict of frame rates its only 1 player per screen... shame it doesn't mention that on the box when its says 2- 18 players... anyone got 18 xbox's and tv 's to hook up?
    as for the campaign it does succeed in endless action trying to envigorate into the storyline. but with great dissappointment like most gamers after the campaign you may just end up like me feeling ripped off and wonder why you queued up first thing for it's release paying for such expense when it is clear false advertisement and the same marketing scam we have come to known for many years that is call of duty.    … Expand
  4. T1d3
    Nov 20, 2011
    10
    The game is simply amazing I feel they tie up the story nicely all the while introducing new characters along with the ones from the previous installments. Multi-player is terrific they really got back to the basics of what made the game fun. overall a 10/10 in my books
  5. Lelon
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    Terrible. Used to love COD. They have actually made a worse game than Black OPs. MW2 is a better game in EVERY respect. Put some effort in next time please developers...
  6. JamieMadrox85
    Nov 20, 2011
    8
    The single player aspect of the game, while predictable, was miles better than battlefield 3's. Battlefield 3's campaign just ended up feeling awkward most of the time with rampant unnecessary QTEs. There were actually very few in MW3 by comparison. The action set pieces of mw3 i feel were pretty well done, though there were only a couple of parts in the game that you might actuallyThe single player aspect of the game, while predictable, was miles better than battlefield 3's. Battlefield 3's campaign just ended up feeling awkward most of the time with rampant unnecessary QTEs. There were actually very few in MW3 by comparison. The action set pieces of mw3 i feel were pretty well done, though there were only a couple of parts in the game that you might actually remember post-finishing the game. On the other hand the multiplayer is basically what you've come to expect from the call of duty series. It still plays great but there isn't a "ton" of new things to check out. Which is basically my only real problem with the game-the lack of new stuff.… Expand
  7. noble77
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    Well what can i say i did not expect anything diffrently from the series. I played mw3 when it came out at a friends house cause i did not want to spend 60 on an expanision pack for the game. And basically thats what it is i have Call of Duty modern warfare and mw2 and black ops and i can honestly say it is more of the same i have been a long time gamer and i cannot believe thatWell what can i say i did not expect anything diffrently from the series. I played mw3 when it came out at a friends house cause i did not want to spend 60 on an expanision pack for the game. And basically thats what it is i have Call of Duty modern warfare and mw2 and black ops and i can honestly say it is more of the same i have been a long time gamer and i cannot believe that activiision is still selling millions of copies of the same game. All they do year after year is add new maps and change how some of the guns sound and the names of the guns. It really is a shame this use to be a good series. So i have found a new series to play which is battlefield 3 that game is really something new and diffrent and they do not release one every year like activision. I mean its ridicoulus they already annouced a new call of duty for next year Call of Duty 2k12. I am joking but seriously its ridicoulus. Over all this game does not deserve all the sales that it has seeing at how many people are disappointed at this game.… Expand
  8. DethLegend
    Nov 20, 2011
    3
    I fell for the marketing ploy once again... Mind you, this low user score rating is no fluke. Yes, the single player campaign is decent although short, the multiplayer experience, which is the majority of its success, is exactly the same game they have released twice before. Yes, the gameplay is smooth and fluid, but it should be considering how old the engine is.
  9. gamingexpert
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    If you can not afford MW3 DONT WORRY you actually might of owned an early copy of it! its called MW2!!! What a huge failure! The huge problems that were in the MW2 were not changed at all and with the graphics not even being any better DONT waste your money.This Game sucked! The single player, multi player, and anything else is the same. They couldn't even change the split screen mode.If you can not afford MW3 DONT WORRY you actually might of owned an early copy of it! its called MW2!!! What a huge failure! The huge problems that were in the MW2 were not changed at all and with the graphics not even being any better DONT waste your money.This Game sucked! The single player, multi player, and anything else is the same. They couldn't even change the split screen mode. Right now when you play survivor mode the split screen does not cover up the screen but a portion of it in order to display the maps .... dumb
    4 player split screen (One of the most fun features) was still dumbed down and nothing added to it. People want to be able to play with there friends on the couch and what better way to do that then 4 player split screen. Well MW3 has that but nothing that keeps us playing. Survivor mode was stupid, only 2 player split-screen? really? IF YOU ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SH!T OUT GAMES THEN ATLEAST MAKE THEM FUN!    … Expand
  10. IISuPaFLy
    Nov 20, 2011
    8
    "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3" is a good game, but online there are some problems. there is a problem with the connection, most of the time, it seems that it takes quite long to get a tag on your enemy, and they also have problems with glitches. however the single player is fenominal once more, truly love that part and that's why this game gets an 8.
  11. tanxs1
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    Rating it 0 just because I'm a BF fanboy.

    Problem IGN?
    Problem Infinity Ward?
    Problem Activision?
    Problem IGN?
    Problem Infinity Ward?
    Problem Activision?
    Problem IGN?
    Problem Infinity Ward?
    Problem Activision?
    Problem IGN?
    Problem Infinity Ward?
    Problem Activision?
  12. REboy5
    Nov 20, 2011
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have been a fan of call of duty since the release of call of duty 2, excluding the games I didn't play up to CoD4 MW. Each game brought in new perks, skills, guns, and graphics and a decent story line. To review MW3 I took a look at the campaign, graphics, and multiplayer experience. Sound would be included, but it is minimally as important as the three stated. Campaign: It comes right off from the ending point of last game with person X being injured etc. The elements are believable in the fact that it there was an EMP blast from a nuke, however the graphic scene was not needed nor added to the game other than a shock and awe aspect. It is more believable that a country would use an EMP blasts than bio weapons to invade a nation or nations. Granted they provided a story that they didn't have the necessary items to achieve the best option, but the Russian military wasn't commanded by the main antagonist so why would they invade under his orders after a bio-weapon attack on multiple countries? Further into the story it is mostly the same types of questions and excitement of fast paced shooting so the final score for campaign came to a 7.
    Graphics: This is pretty easy, I put in MW2 and looked at MW3 and noticed very little difference in graphic quality other than lighting and sharper images which I feel can be achieved with an update considering it uses the same engine, the lack of innovation or development brings the score to a failing grade, but still enough that it portrays the graphics are better than many games out there, 5.
    Multiplayer experience: This is hard to say as there are many different modes that people can play, I personally played Kill-confirmed, TDM, and SnD as well as Hardcore variants. The maps I felt after reaching level 36 as of now were semi confusing and slightly one sided if a team was smart enough to camp a specific area (Being smart isn't grounds for saying the map sucks I know). However the maps had many corners which made it difficult to center yourself as well as a central area that is common in the maps as the hot zone. The guns that were introduced in the game were fine and all, however it still felt weird to me that many of the guns had different iron sights, but in general felt relatively the same as MW2 guns. I know I may be reaching with this, but the Type 95 I believe is one of the most overpowered guns I have seen in a long time, I would put it at the equivalent of 1887's in MW2 before they were nerfed. I know this may be fixed over time with patches but currently for the game to have 1 man get shot by two different people which includes myself with a Scar-H and have this guy kill both of us in different directions with 1 burst is ridiculous. I might as well just run around with a sniper rifle, drop shot you while quick scoping. This brings me to sniping. I have only found maybe 2-3 maps where sniping has its uses across a large span of space, so the maps don't really help out when you have a billion corners and you're trying to snipe. Many say l2p and quickscope...well sure it's in the game they brought it back as well as drop shots. I don't mind either, but I feel like they brought back quick scoping because well you need it for those tight corners or else you're useless as a sniper. Personally I like just looking through a scope, some others may not so that's their preference, but make a map where sniping really does take place instead of quick scopes as the only option for players to have a decent score in close quarter battles. I'll reiterate I don't care that other players use quick scope or drop shot, it can be frustrating but hey they learned something I didn't so they have that advantage over me which is a legitimate thing to have. It's not like they hacked the game to do it, I have as much ability and choice to learn how to as they do so props to people of quick scope and aren't dicks about it. Perks, well those change all the time, no biggie just no more of running around the map like a ninja. Kill streaks and support streaks....Oh man I like the new kill-streak ability where if you keep killing it just restarts, but support streaks really? So if I just don't have any skill over my opponents I can die 25 times and get 8 kills and I'll still be able to call in an EMP? (I really don't remember what you need for an EMP I don't use it so don't be mad). I remember that kill-streaks were supposed to reward you for your skill and not for trying. I understand that you want the game to be accessible for a lot of people, but there has to be a line drawn. You don't deserve a streak unless you get 3 kills minimum, because at least you provide for the team instead of a situation where a guy gets kills because he just happened by when a guy reloaded and has a KDR of .16. so Multiplayer you get a fat 6, get rid of support streaks.    … Expand
  13. flamingpretzel
    Nov 20, 2011
    9
    First off, let me say that this is my first review. I generally don't play games for the multiplayer, and MW3 was no exception. I played the multiplayer, went 'meh' and moved on. I loved the campaign though, and thought it was very fun. The graphics are old, but still hold up IMO. Because, after all, that's what a user review is. An opinion. rantrantrant. Anyway, it was a fun game, playedFirst off, let me say that this is my first review. I generally don't play games for the multiplayer, and MW3 was no exception. I played the multiplayer, went 'meh' and moved on. I loved the campaign though, and thought it was very fun. The graphics are old, but still hold up IMO. Because, after all, that's what a user review is. An opinion. rantrantrant. Anyway, it was a fun game, played very well, and I enjoyed it.… Expand
  14. unbiased0802
    Nov 20, 2011
    9
    First off, would everyone please stop comparing Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3. From a multiplayer standpoint, they are completely different. The only thing they have in common is the fact that they are both military shooters. BF3 provides huge maps and more tactical, methodical gameplay. MW3 is a run-and-gun, encounter-heavy shooter, with a smaller strategic empasis. You can likeFirst off, would everyone please stop comparing Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3. From a multiplayer standpoint, they are completely different. The only thing they have in common is the fact that they are both military shooters. BF3 provides huge maps and more tactical, methodical gameplay. MW3 is a run-and-gun, encounter-heavy shooter, with a smaller strategic empasis. You can like both games people. I do. I simply like them for different reasons. Now for my actual review. Obviously, MW3 is largely a rehash of MW2. Graphically, it is NOT an improvement. The fundamental gameplay is identical. The mission selection, however, is more varied than MW2, which was a welcome surprise. The campaign is still too short. But that is from the perspective of someone who values the campaign just as much as the multiplayer. Most players buy the game for the multiplayer, and view the campaign as a bonus. In that sense, a 6 hour campaign is respectable. The story is still generic. It's more over-the-top action. Many people complain about this, but the fact is that most video games appeal to our sense of wanting to live out a fantasy vicariously from our couch. The campaign is no different from any other game in that respect. But the biggest reason I can give a 9 out of 10 to this 3rd installment in the seemingly stale CoD franchise and still look at myself in the mirror is a factor that I think most "professional" reviewers overlook. I call this the Fun Factor. At the end of the day, MW3 is still a lot of fun to play. The reason that you don't see innovation on a grand scale is because such innovation is NOT NECESSARY. Just look at the sales figures and tell me if you would change the CoD formula if you were Infinity Ward or Activision. No you would not. And no, not only 12 year-olds buy this game. I am a 27 year-old history teacher with a beautiful wife and daughter, and I bought the game and enjoy it for what it is. If you are a BF3 player who is a MW3 hater or vice versa, please remember that these are both amazing games with DIFFERENT things to offer. You should enjoy the fact that so many developers turn out such beautiful products regularly. This competition is what drives these developers to give us such great games. So enjoy it!… Expand
  15. adamrains
    Nov 20, 2011
    2
    Given the enormous teaser trailers released via the internet and Xbox Live, I had expected that MW3 would have a huge focus on an epic global campaign mode. I didn't expect much out of the multiplayer feature of the game. Once a franchise like this hits it's stride, you can only reinvent the wheel so many times. However, the product I ended up taking home for $60, after playing through,Given the enormous teaser trailers released via the internet and Xbox Live, I had expected that MW3 would have a huge focus on an epic global campaign mode. I didn't expect much out of the multiplayer feature of the game. Once a franchise like this hits it's stride, you can only reinvent the wheel so many times. However, the product I ended up taking home for $60, after playing through, felt like more of an insult than a gaming experience. First off, the campaign mode was ridiculously short, given the expectations laid down by Infinity Ward's marketing team. I was looking forward to a crazy World War III scenario. At the very least, I was hoping that the team would make it to Moscow. Instead, what I got was a bunch of short-ish and uninteresting Delta Force situations that took me less than 4 hours to shoot my way through. To frame it in a different context...I felt like MW 2 was one of the best first person shooters ever made, in addition to having a great anti-war message. MW 3 just felt like a game hellbent on cruise control. Instead of having a bunch of Special Ops missions, I would much rather have seen more effort and time put into the Campaign mode. I don't care about a bunch of little missions (whose difficulty is through the roof, I suppose, to give you the illusion of more game hours,) and while I thought the Survival mode was a nice touch, I would've gladly given it up for the same reasons. The developing team really screwed the pooch here, attempting to be a jack of all trades and a master of none. Of course, Infinity Ward probably knew at this point that all they needed to do is make Multiplayer good and people wouldn't complain. So that's what they put more focus on than anything...but by "focus", I only mean "a few new features and a handful of features ripped from Call of Duty: Black Ops." But they did launch the Elite app, which allows them to take your money a little early for content that nobody cares about. My guess is that they knew that they didn't have to work as hard to make a quality game, since this one wraps up the story of the last two, and people would buy it anyway in anticipation. As far as game mechanics for Multiplayer go...more of the same. I think I actually preferred the currency system of Black Ops, so I don't have to grind to level up weapons. I'd rather earn XP and buy them. As a casual gamer, I have no desire to spend 8 to 16 hours on Xbox Live so that I can have a hybrid sight for my AK 47. (I will say that the hybrid sight was a cool new addition, but one among very few.) The divide and conquer approach to the Perks / Weapon Leveling system was unnecessary and stupid. I would've been happy with it being fine the way it was. In closing, I'm sure a lot of time, money, and hard work went into developing this game. I'm sure that hours were tirelessly spent by Infinity Ward's development team trying to figure out how to squeeze fresh blood from an already dried up and overused turnip. Either that, or they wasted a bunch of time on two useless game modes while neglecting the Campaign mode, switching a few features around on Multiplayer, and pouring millions of dollars into promoting a game with a lackluster plot, redundant features to the last two games, and no passion whatsoever.… Expand
  16. WoodWarrior509
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    If you don't put in the effort to do anything but repackage the previous game (or in this case the previous 3 or 4 games) then you get a zero for effort. This is a 45-60$ map pack.
  17. ChrnoTodd
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    everything else is the same as all call of duty MW , CoD MW2, CoD WoW and CoD BO. This CoD iS THE SAME with another name. Activision, in one generation you make a CTRL + C CTRL + V of the same game and change the same.
  18. JH210
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    Ok, so everybody keeps saying that this game is terrible. i understand why they would say this. however i don't hate the game. first off the campaign is great. obviously campaign isnt the same thing as multiplayer, but it was fun, had a lot of variety, and had a good ending. second off, spec ops is better then ever. in my opinion survival mode is better than zombies. others may not agreeOk, so everybody keeps saying that this game is terrible. i understand why they would say this. however i don't hate the game. first off the campaign is great. obviously campaign isnt the same thing as multiplayer, but it was fun, had a lot of variety, and had a good ending. second off, spec ops is better then ever. in my opinion survival mode is better than zombies. others may not agree with me but this is my opinion. a lot of people dont like survival because it is only a 2 person game, but to tell you the truth it wouldn't be fun with 3-4 people. also it would be extremely easy on low waves, and then extremely difficult on high waves(because of how chaotic it would be).also the mission modes are good. if you like them in mw2 then you'll like them now. Finally, online is good but not great (but certainly not terrible either). i do have to admit it is a lot like mw2. but is that really a bad thing? mw2 was amazing. i still play it 3 years later. this game has most of the things that were great from cod4 and the things that were great from mw2, then put them into another game and added some better features. i dont see anything wrong with that. so, overall this game is good. and is definitely deserves more credit than it deserves.… Expand
  19. BLACKBOY0G
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    Black ops is better than this game in graphics and everthing else. You cant dive to prone,no 4 player co op, and everybody can get gold guns at the start and the killstreaks sucks. SORRiEST GAME I EVER PLAYED....
  20. mussot360
    Nov 20, 2011
    10
    Its just the same as ever, noting new, there is not innovation, i have to say that is a fun game, but if you cant play it, do not worry, CoD Franchise has always been the same
  21. GarethCritic
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    Modern Warfare 3 is nothing special. Infinity Ward haven't changed a lot since Modern Warfare BUT what the changes they have made are decent, such as spoint streaks rather than kill streaks and optional strike packages. MW3 is just as addicting as any other Call of Duty game but it's essentially the same you've played a few times before. There are a lot of mistakes in this game too, thereModern Warfare 3 is nothing special. Infinity Ward haven't changed a lot since Modern Warfare BUT what the changes they have made are decent, such as spoint streaks rather than kill streaks and optional strike packages. MW3 is just as addicting as any other Call of Duty game but it's essentially the same you've played a few times before. There are a lot of mistakes in this game too, there are perk set ups that make you undectable to any air support what so ever, there are guns that are too powerful and there are even a few glitches in the game. When you play Modern Warfare 3, you'll have fun until you get shot by someone sitting in a corner with Blind Eye, Assassin and Dead Silence or get hit with lag. After an hour or two, the fun of the game is gone and it will do nothing but frustrate you to the point that you that you want to take the disc out and snap it in half.… Expand
  22. gonrambo
    Nov 20, 2011
    6
    Let me start off by saying that since cod4 I have been playing every call of duty title. Cod4 was an amazing and realistic shooter game. But the modern warfare series has steadily grown stagnant. I for one am sick of playing these games online because they reward people for not moving at all (camping). At least Black Ops got their killstreaks right. And another thing that bugs me: for allLet me start off by saying that since cod4 I have been playing every call of duty title. Cod4 was an amazing and realistic shooter game. But the modern warfare series has steadily grown stagnant. I for one am sick of playing these games online because they reward people for not moving at all (camping). At least Black Ops got their killstreaks right. And another thing that bugs me: for all of the money that infinity ward rakes in on these games, they still have not implemented dedicated servers. It is darn near impossible to take an enemy out when you have three bars. Don't get me wrong. This game still gets some things right. For instance, the control scheme is still as good as ever and I rarely realize I have a controller in my hands. The online leveling system is really addictive, although I would have liked a currency and contract system a lot more than the standard "wait til you unlock it" of previous mw games.While the campaign is at times thrilling, I believe IW could have done better in the enemy spawn system they have implemented in the game than have enemies come flooding in to the map every time you turn the corner.Why couldn't the enemies just be there waiting for you?( in some instances). Finally, I wish that IW would listen to their fans more instead of resting on their past success. We the consumer do know a thing or two about what we would like in future games.… Expand
  23. Locke357
    Nov 20, 2011
    2
    I popped my roommate's copy of this game in for a couple hours, and was astonished by how identical it is to MW2. It is quite literally a re-skin of MW2, where did the two years of development go? Copy-pasted UI, copy-pasted local multiplayer, copy-pasted online multiplayer, what the hell?
  24. Whitey91
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    If anyone ever followed tomb raider we've seen that a good game that doesn't see any innovation will score low. That game is now mw3. Ever since cod4 it has been essentially the same game.
  25. Ctmuniz
    Nov 20, 2011
    6
    Let me cut this short, I loved IW, I loved Call of duty, I loved call of duty 2, I LOVED call of duty 4, and I wanted to MARRY modern warfare 2, however this game was an extreme dissapointment. The campaign is not nearly as exciting as the last 2 and you can tell this game was rushed from all the legal issues the company faced. The multiplayer is OK but it hasn't really changed in largeLet me cut this short, I loved IW, I loved Call of duty, I loved call of duty 2, I LOVED call of duty 4, and I wanted to MARRY modern warfare 2, however this game was an extreme dissapointment. The campaign is not nearly as exciting as the last 2 and you can tell this game was rushed from all the legal issues the company faced. The multiplayer is OK but it hasn't really changed in large ways like MW2 did. I don't play for balance, I play for fun, and until now, IW delivered. Sorry but save your money and get battlefield 3 if you got a PC that can handle it. I am not a battlefield 3 fanboy, but it is alot of fun on PC but it sucks on consoles.… Expand
  26. ScoobyTheBeast
    Nov 20, 2011
    5
    OK I'm changing my review, its only two weeks in and people already know which guns to exploit (Type 96, AK47, UMP, P90, every shotgun, every machine pistol, and the one shot kill anywhere snipers), theres drop shotting everywhere since the diving is gone, and after 5 minutes in a lobby you know for sure that Infinity Ward probably didn't do any balancing or beta testing, and if they didOK I'm changing my review, its only two weeks in and people already know which guns to exploit (Type 96, AK47, UMP, P90, every shotgun, every machine pistol, and the one shot kill anywhere snipers), theres drop shotting everywhere since the diving is gone, and after 5 minutes in a lobby you know for sure that Infinity Ward probably didn't do any balancing or beta testing, and if they did then they must have coded it blindly. The weapon proficiencies that you unlock by ranking the weapon up, make the broken weapons more broken. For instance, the Type 95 is a burst fire weapon that normally only takes two out of the 3 bullets to connect for a kill, now put the two attachments proficiency on with a red dot and a grenade launcher and you have an unstoppable class. The AK47 takes two bullets to kill but is supposedly offset but its huge recoil and horrible accuracy, now use the less recoil proficiency with a red dot and you can gun down a whole team without emptying a clip.… Expand
  27. Jensen2023
    Nov 20, 2011
    1
    Take a MW2 disk, tip-ex out the logo and write MW3 over the top. Congratulations, you are now the proud owner of a copy of Modern Warfare 3. If you've never owned another CoD game, go for it, you'll have loads of fun, but if you have (and I suspect you have) anything over 10$ is too much for this game.
  28. Dantedamean
    Nov 20, 2011
    0
    Yes I am one of those guys that is giving this game a 0, before you judge me I ask that you read my whole review. I recently read a few articles on IGN that seemed to have a tone of disappointment or disapproval for so many users giving modern warfare 3 a 0. Those articles are what sparked me to wright this. I see this as more of a protest. When a corporation sets out to ruin a market,Yes I am one of those guys that is giving this game a 0, before you judge me I ask that you read my whole review. I recently read a few articles on IGN that seemed to have a tone of disappointment or disapproval for so many users giving modern warfare 3 a 0. Those articles are what sparked me to wright this. I see this as more of a protest. When a corporation sets out to ruin a market, I say this based on past franchises ( guitar hero ), and there target audience are the same sheaple that are wiling to buy madden every year how are gamers to protest? How do we tell Activision that this is not ok? Do we boycott? When hardcore gamers only make up a small percentage of the games target audience how are we supposed to boycott? Do we make a bunch of angry blog posts? Or do we hit them were we can get the most publicity and let our voices be heard? I believe this is the only format that we can effectively protest and state our unhappiness where anyone will listen. Despite what any media outlet thinks about whats going on here I say this is one of the few times Ive actually seen gamers unite. Judging by the publicity I say its working.… Expand
  29. PurplePlains
    Nov 20, 2011
    3
    Put simply the online multiplayer mode is no fun any more. Call of Duty has become such a large and continuous franchise that the user base has expanded massively, leading to the once glorious days of killing noobs online and getting killstreaks, to the now defunct and clearly broken, unfair mechanics which lead to everyone running around and getting killed, forget killstreaks because youPut simply the online multiplayer mode is no fun any more. Call of Duty has become such a large and continuous franchise that the user base has expanded massively, leading to the once glorious days of killing noobs online and getting killstreaks, to the now defunct and clearly broken, unfair mechanics which lead to everyone running around and getting killed, forget killstreaks because you won't get any, it is literally impossible to turn a corner without a camper, hacker or no-scoper putting a bullet in your head. A once great online experience tarnished due to a rushed development team making casual drivel, I will not be purchasing any other games in the series from now on.… Expand
  30. wafflewithsyrup
    Nov 20, 2011
    9
    Why are people getting so fussed up about this game? I mean seriously, everybody has to hate. 97 percent of the people giving negative reviews are just complaining about the graphics. Just because Battlefield got a graphic update does not mean that every other videogame in the world must do so too.
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 »