Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

 Xbox 360
User Score
3.5

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 8685 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2,253 out of 8685
  2. Mixed: 954 out of 8685
  3. Negative: 5,478 out of 8685
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. bmartin717
    Nov 21, 2011
    4
    I was a huge Call of Duty fan when the first one came out. Call of Duty 2 was the first game i owned for the xbox 360 and provided many great hours of fun. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is still one of my favorite games ever and when my friends and I LAN together this is still our shooter of choice. Since then the games have gotten not only not innovated but have gotten worse. The lack ofI was a huge Call of Duty fan when the first one came out. Call of Duty 2 was the first game i owned for the xbox 360 and provided many great hours of fun. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is still one of my favorite games ever and when my friends and I LAN together this is still our shooter of choice. Since then the games have gotten not only not innovated but have gotten worse. The lack of dedicated servers is a huge downgrade for this game. All the added perks and care packages and all that turned this amazing shooter into a joke of a game. Yes the game still has tight controls and good enough graphics but the series is headed in the wrong direction very quickly.… Expand
  2. Ardilla
    Nov 14, 2011
    4
    I have a hard time giving this game a high score based on the fact that it is the same as the previous games just done better. Yes, the graphics are smoothed out and add a lot to the mood of the maps. Yes, it has a more in depth perk/upgrade/leveling system. Yes, the weapons feel more real with scope sway, more recoil and less shots to kill your enemy. Yes, they took the best from allI have a hard time giving this game a high score based on the fact that it is the same as the previous games just done better. Yes, the graphics are smoothed out and add a lot to the mood of the maps. Yes, it has a more in depth perk/upgrade/leveling system. Yes, the weapons feel more real with scope sway, more recoil and less shots to kill your enemy. Yes, they took the best from all the MW games and combined it into one, but it is exactly that, the Voltron of MW games. If you like the MW games and looking for something a drastically new, then your looking in the wrong place. If you are looking for something that is the same just better then you are looking for this game. I can't give it a high score because of it being more of the same, but I can say you will enjoy this if you like the other games and you weren't looking for anything ground breaking.… Expand
  3. MikeVLC
    Nov 14, 2011
    4
    dont improve MW2 graphics,
    worse lag than Black Ops,
    Black Ops is more solid in online, maps are logical and menus, perks and weapons are more confortable to use. West and Zampella abandoned Infinity Ward and this MW3 we show that the genius of ModernWarfare are out, now they are working in EA . At the end he only one that lose are the gamers, the industry dont improve MW3 is not much    dont improve MW2 graphics,
    worse lag than Black Ops,
    Black Ops is more solid in online, maps are logical and menus, perks and weapons are more confortable to use.
    West and Zampella abandoned Infinity Ward and this MW3 we show that the genius of ModernWarfare are out, now they are working in EA
    . At the end he only one that lose are the gamers, the industry dont improve MW3 is not much better than MW2    … Expand
  4. MusicaX79
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    when I started playing the game the first thought I had was "this is the same engine as modern warfare 2." as the story progressed I found myself asking where in this campaign is there a level that I would want to play again and again. In both modern warfare 1 and 2 there were levels I just wanted to play over and over. But this time I would probably only play the campaign to getwhen I started playing the game the first thought I had was "this is the same engine as modern warfare 2." as the story progressed I found myself asking where in this campaign is there a level that I would want to play again and again. In both modern warfare 1 and 2 there were levels I just wanted to play over and over. But this time I would probably only play the campaign to get achievements at most. There is nothing new to the campaign besides awesome weapons. The story is short about 4-6 hours on normal at most. And what little story there is, it is just a reboot of the combined ideas of modern warfare 1 and 2. I had no "wow" moment I had more of a "here we go again". For the campaign the gameplay is the same but the story is old and feels like a reboot. The multiplayer has become more "balanced" or as I like to call it become more "unrealistic". Shotguns are now pea shoots at most. And the multiplayer is mostly the same as modern warfare 2. The addition of survival adds a lot of fun but getting stuck with the guy who leaves his post to take your kills and results in you getting flanked by the enemy gets old fast. Survival is enjoyable but it does not allow you the customization nor the number of guns that you can get in multiplayer. As a result it feels unfinished and not as enjoyable as it could have been. Spec ops is back with no difference what so ever to modern warfare 2. All and all the campaign is a disappoint; as it brings nothing new to the table, same with both the multiplayer and spec ops. The only thing remotely new is survival and that is incomplete. All I can say is congrats Activision on sucking the life out of another great game.… Expand
  5. remy87
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    Everyone has stated the obvious-Graphics are EXACTLY the same, story is boring, gameplay is the same... no real innovations whatsoever. This game to me has only become good when playing with a group of friends. It's sickening to see someone coming around a corner, aim down your sights and shoot them only to be killed by them, then when watching the kill cam it shows that apparantly theyEveryone has stated the obvious-Graphics are EXACTLY the same, story is boring, gameplay is the same... no real innovations whatsoever. This game to me has only become good when playing with a group of friends. It's sickening to see someone coming around a corner, aim down your sights and shoot them only to be killed by them, then when watching the kill cam it shows that apparantly they got a 5 shot head start on you. Or being shot at, running behind a wall, only to die from delayed and horrible hit detection. In MW I feel as if I should always bring a knife to a gun battle, it's ridiculous attempting to kill someone who is even remotely close to you, cuz all you'll see is a quick movement and then... death... a knife kill from 5 feet away... ask somebody in the military, if you're 5 feet away from someone, in order to "knife" them you'd have to lunge at them... unrealistic knifing. If you want to knife someone in MW then they need to add a struggle system, make people work to get knife kills just like we have to do with guns. How about this sweet flaw that has yet to be fixed: I die... I spawn and take 7 steps before being killed from behind... How about setting up designated spawn areas for both teams with NO spawn camping, hell if u need to, add turrets near each spawn that kill any enemy trying to camp around them, point is, get rid of spawn camping and get rid of enemies spawning behind us for easy kills! This game is frustrating on so many levels. I am in no way an elite player, but I consider myself a really good player, however, if you play with random people who know all the camping spots and know the hit detection and auto-aim really well, you will literally be destroyed and made to look like an amateur. Battlefield 3 is my game of choice between the two. I can play Battlefield with friends and myself, but MW3 is a game I only group up with friends for, that way, when I start getting pissed, somebody can crack a joke and keep the mood fun. So my suggestion, if you havent given BF3 a chance, go out and do so. The aiming is better, the maps are better, and skill truly shows in that game. In BF3 my KD is a 2.7 and I run and gun, in MW3 I am a 1.37.… Expand
  6. Chronickaos
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    this call of duty feels no different from the others. The graphics are no better than mw2 and the online play is nothing special. Of course they have a couple new guns and perks but over all its pretty much the same. Its almost like paying 60 bucks for a new multiplayer map pack for mw2. But there is one this about this game that i do find exceptionally fun and new which is the gamethis call of duty feels no different from the others. The graphics are no better than mw2 and the online play is nothing special. Of course they have a couple new guns and perks but over all its pretty much the same. Its almost like paying 60 bucks for a new multiplayer map pack for mw2. But there is one this about this game that i do find exceptionally fun and new which is the game survival mode. Again its nothing to blow the roof off with but it is challenging and is fun. but its one of those things after you play for a while youll get bored of it. so i wouldn't waster your money on buying this game. Just stick with black ops your not missing anything.… Expand
  7. GhekoWaR
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    This is by no means a great game. The single player is ok but nothing new but no one buys it for the campaign. The multiplayer is even more broken than Black Ops. Hit markers are awful and the games revolve around least lag wins. The maps are small and uninteresting with too much clutter to camp around in. Kill/confirm is a good game mode but all the games problems ruin the experience.This is by no means a great game. The single player is ok but nothing new but no one buys it for the campaign. The multiplayer is even more broken than Black Ops. Hit markers are awful and the games revolve around least lag wins. The maps are small and uninteresting with too much clutter to camp around in. Kill/confirm is a good game mode but all the games problems ruin the experience. Even when having a really good round I dont get the same enjoyment as I did in BO's as I assume my lag was less than my opponents. I have not even gone into theatre mode as nothing in any of my games has made me want to review it, which is a shame as i spent hours in BO's making cool videos to show friends on-line. It feels as though we have been sold MW2 with Black Op's online issues and as they never fixed BO's they will probably never fix this. Pity.… Expand
  8. Sageofprofessio
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    After watching this game for a while and looking at all the hype, I finally decided to join my University's Games Club for the midnight release. When I got the game and instantly hopped onto it, I got what I expected, the same experience from all the other Call of Duty games I have come to enjoy. What I am disappointed in is the fact that this Game felt more like a content pack than a fullAfter watching this game for a while and looking at all the hype, I finally decided to join my University's Games Club for the midnight release. When I got the game and instantly hopped onto it, I got what I expected, the same experience from all the other Call of Duty games I have come to enjoy. What I am disappointed in is the fact that this Game felt more like a content pack than a full game. I feel like I've just wasted $40 on a bit of reskinning, a couple new weapons and attachments, a recycled story concept, and some original multiplayer maps maps. While the game is fun to play, and shares the same addictivity as the other games in the series, I found that it felt dated in both the gameplay and presentation departments. There were no new additions to the multiplayer system, aside from the two types of kill streaks, and a game mode literally ripped from Halo Reach's headhunter mode. Initially I thought that the Weapons Proficiencies were a good idea, it took me about 2 minutes to realize that it was simply the MW1 and MW2 weapons systems simply retooled, tweaked and given a nice sugar glaze coat for the public. The graphics, while they are sill good, are dated. While activision manages to keep the framerate steady at XX fps (whatever it is), it appears that they sacrificed the overal model texturing and antiailiasing, instead relying upon epic moments to make up for graphics deficiencies. Overall, while I do like the game, it's lack of innovations and recycled elements detract from the "bang for your buck" value of the $60 purchase, leaving something that feels like it would have fit better in a $30 DLC or expansion pack.… Expand
  9. Krankstar2K
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    Why a 4 .. The multiplayer is said to be all the best put together , however in comparisson to MW2 the levels feel very generic . What happened to awesome levels like Terminal , Estate , Afghan .. pretty much all the MW2 lvls without the expansions were pretty great .. they had places to hide and be "tactical".. MW3 maps are trash , not fun .. they all have the same feel .. everything hasWhy a 4 .. The multiplayer is said to be all the best put together , however in comparisson to MW2 the levels feel very generic . What happened to awesome levels like Terminal , Estate , Afghan .. pretty much all the MW2 lvls without the expansions were pretty great .. they had places to hide and be "tactical".. MW3 maps are trash , not fun .. they all have the same feel .. everything has invisible walls .. even bushes. This game really just feels like a expansion with tweaked multiplayer. I spent alot of time on MW2 , and even WaW and BOps , however am having a very difficult time forcing myself to play it. The single player is of course sort of neat .. but mainly only because of the special wow moments of the destuction happening in the background such as the falling of the eiffel tower. None of course is really interactive. The rest of the game is just shoot and take down a swarm of unrealistic AI enemies which are set to come when your player reaches a point or until to reach a set point to make them stop and continue with the story. Then as if a 60 Dollar price tag wasnt enough .. you can purchase a 50 dollar 1 year membership to basically get the expansions when games like Battlefield will have the first expansion and its free which is releasing in December. So just for the basic version plan on dishing out 110.00 Bucks to play everything. Modern Warfare 3 is a okay game .. however you can see the difference in quality from when Infinity Ward was truley a sole company and when the leftover Infinity Ward and SledgeHammer games get toghether and put out a "sequel"… Expand
  10. ZombieRobot
    Mar 18, 2022
    4
    Honestly there is nothing new to this game. It plays exactly the same as all the previous Call of Duty games since Modern Warfare 1. The graphics are the same, the sound is the same, and worst of all the game play is exactly the same.
  11. tatr76
    Nov 17, 2011
    4
    Some nice ideas added but again to many problems drown this out. Matchmaking a joke on Xbox. Signed up to elite though still waiting to log on, too much traffic. Really just a big map pack.
  12. lintmaster
    Mar 9, 2012
    4
    I was a BIG fan of cod4 and mw2 but the shine has definitely worn off for me with mw3. Pretty much everything felt the same as the previous COD games. The kill animations were still rag doll, the same sounds, the same non-destructable environments with the same measly amount of environmental bullet damage. How cool could it have been to pull out your light machine gun and totally shred theI was a BIG fan of cod4 and mw2 but the shine has definitely worn off for me with mw3. Pretty much everything felt the same as the previous COD games. The kill animations were still rag doll, the same sounds, the same non-destructable environments with the same measly amount of environmental bullet damage. How cool could it have been to pull out your light machine gun and totally shred the environment? Instead we have same same superficial bullet holes that guns made back in COD4. How cool would it have been to have dynamic environments? You air strike a building and then have 3 different types of rubbled building that would appear in its place for the remainder of the game. How cool would it have been to shoot somebody and have them fall off a ledge and come crashing down with a THUMP in a cloud of dust or nail them with a shotgun and have them fly backwards crashing into a table or wall? But no, we're stuck with the same old 1997 animations.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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