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. juddicusmaximus
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    I had to make an account to add to this, this is AT BEST a poor expansion, i wasn't expecting much, but was still disappointed. what is weird about it? literally NO reason for sniper rifles to even be in multiplayer, not a single map is built to take advantage of range, and with the addition of the stalker perk allowing people to run and aim puts this game in more of a relationship toI had to make an account to add to this, this is AT BEST a poor expansion, i wasn't expecting much, but was still disappointed. what is weird about it? literally NO reason for sniper rifles to even be in multiplayer, not a single map is built to take advantage of range, and with the addition of the stalker perk allowing people to run and aim puts this game in more of a relationship to quake than any other MW game thus far. spec ops is cool, but my last cod let me play with 4 people in the other mode, this is 2? mmk. the guns sound neat and everything, but given that you can unlock more stuff for using the same one makes it hard for me to swap from my M4.
    With all of the maps being SO CLOSE QUARTERS, i know this game will turn into just people using SMGs. the precision guns like the M16 are worthless, all you need to do is spray. No innovation, all confusion. i am not a fan, this is the year to skip out on the COD franchise much like a bad madden game, its cheaper to just wait for the next. unfortunately i traded BO and MW2 in towards this... SO glad i didnt get elite membership though!    … Expand
  2. TakingOutTrash
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    Same game. I would have given this game a "1" rating, but honestly. the Online is NOT as broken as MW2.. therefore Activision managed to get something fixed.

    +2 for some balancing
    -7 for same engine as CoD4
    -1000 dignity for every Activision team member who worked on CoD4, then proceeded to make terrible games thereafter. Just stop. CoD 4 is still better than MW3, that was 4 years ago.
  3. CYBER_SLUNK
    Nov 8, 2011
    3
    It's MW2 with worse graphics, smaller/crappier maps, and the speed turned up a few notches. For little kids hopped up on mountain dew to run around and die (with no respawn timer) while screaming profanities. It sucks.
  4. pgunna
    Nov 14, 2011
    3
    This game is recycled garbage, Black Ops was a much better game than this This is a step backwards in innovation! The menus are lazy, the maps are not thoughtful and there is no innovation here at all. I feel like they stole $60 from me and I would like it back.
  5. Faux
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    My instinct was to give this game a 5- It defines "mediocre". It is not bad by any stretch. No, rather it is tired. It looks like MW2 and plays like MW2, which could have been forgiven if it was written like MW1. It wasn't. Expectation games are dangerous if your product doesn't come up to snuff, and so I'm giving it a 3.

    Things I like- just like MW2 the production values are fine.    My instinct was to give this game a 5- It defines "mediocre". It is not bad by any stretch. No, rather it is tired. It looks like MW2 and plays like MW2, which could have been forgiven if it was written like MW1. It wasn't. Expectation games are dangerous if your product doesn't come up to snuff, and so I'm giving it a 3.

    Things I like- just like MW2 the production values are fine. The single player campaign is over-the-top Michael-Bay-esque, and when it runs out of compelling story it uses swelling music or slo-vision chaos to give the appearance of emotional depth.

    Things I don't like- paying $60 for the same thing I purchased a few years ago. The technology is the same, the gameplay is the same, the environments are different and yet feel the same. It feels like a lazy installment of the series, hyped in order to make money rather than create a worthy successor to this landmark series.    … Expand
  6. BuggedJune
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    I've come to terms with this game for what it is. an absolutely mindless arcade shooter that has no meat whatsoever. The franchise that defined itself for being the most realistic shooter at the time has less ties to realism than star wars had to WW1. thankfully i haven't expected too much from the game, and i wasn't terribly disappointed by the co-op stuff they added to the game, butI've come to terms with this game for what it is. an absolutely mindless arcade shooter that has no meat whatsoever. The franchise that defined itself for being the most realistic shooter at the time has less ties to realism than star wars had to WW1. thankfully i haven't expected too much from the game, and i wasn't terribly disappointed by the co-op stuff they added to the game, but aside from that? yeah, don't bother.… Expand
  7. butternut86
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    Call of Duty 4 Modern warfare was an amazing game. I loved it. It was a ton of fun with great multiplayer. Modern Warfare 2 was similar to COD 4, but still pretty good. This game is a carbon copy of the COD games that came out before it.

    Activision doesn't bother to make a new game engine. It continually copies the same game year in and year out. I'm tired of spending 60 bucks for a    Call of Duty 4 Modern warfare was an amazing game. I loved it. It was a ton of fun with great multiplayer. Modern Warfare 2 was similar to COD 4, but still pretty good. This game is a carbon copy of the COD games that came out before it.

    Activision doesn't bother to make a new game engine. It continually copies the same game year in and year out. I'm tired of spending 60 bucks for a carbon copy of a game I played last year. I said to myself I would never buy a COD game again after Black ops. I'm tired of being fooled by activision. I DID play this game at my friends house. A lot of my friends are still under Activisions spell. They don't realize they are getting ripped off. The game is essentially the same as Modern Warfare 2. The campaign is the same, and so is the MP. The survival mode is new, but nothing special. PEOPLE NEED TO STOP BUYING COD GAMES SO ACTIVISION WILL MAKE A NEW GAME ENGINE!!!!

    If people keep buying COD games that reuse the same engine, Activision will keep making a carbon copies of their games. We need to send Activision a message and teach them a lesson that we won't fall for their money hungry tactics anymore. From this moment forward, promise yourself that you wont:

    Buy a Carbon copy of a COD game. DON"T BUY NEXT years COD!!

    You wont pay 15 dollars for four maps

    You won't wait online at midnight to buy a rehashed game

    The list can go on and on.. but the bottom line is, Activision will keep using their customers if they keep buying this crap. Stand up and don't take it anymore. As gamers, we deserve better. Activision hasn't changed their engine since 2007. Thats complete garbage.    … Expand
  8. Beavz0r
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    If I had to rate the campaign, I would give it a 6-7 for being pretty fun and having such a grand scale of scope, but I'd have to dock it for aging visuals that are noticeably falling behind when compared to recent titles, such as Witcher 2, BF3, or Uncharted 3, or the upcoming behemoth Skyrim.

    Multiplayer plays the same as ever, and at least for me, is probably why the game already    If I had to rate the campaign, I would give it a 6-7 for being pretty fun and having such a grand scale of scope, but I'd have to dock it for aging visuals that are noticeably falling behind when compared to recent titles, such as Witcher 2, BF3, or Uncharted 3, or the upcoming behemoth Skyrim.

    Multiplayer plays the same as ever, and at least for me, is probably why the game already begins to feel dull after only ten hours of online play. It's the same reason I don't buy Madden year after year - I'd rather wait until a major change or innovation comes along to turn things fresh again.

    For that reason alone, I most likely will find myself finishing off the last few hours of the campaign, and shelving it for the time being.    … Expand
  9. Charades
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    At some point, as a fan, you have to put your foot down and point out the bull-crap you're being fed. I'm sorry, I understand this game has good reviews and that's what people are going to be looking at, but I feel like I've been duped and I need to go somewhere to express my opinion. Looks like I'm not alone. This game is more or less, Modern Warfare 2. I feel like each year's MaddenAt some point, as a fan, you have to put your foot down and point out the bull-crap you're being fed. I'm sorry, I understand this game has good reviews and that's what people are going to be looking at, but I feel like I've been duped and I need to go somewhere to express my opinion. Looks like I'm not alone. This game is more or less, Modern Warfare 2. I feel like each year's Madden iteration has more advancement than this series. The fact that they're going to pile on the DLC, it's just bad vibes. Be wary of this game, unless you just want more of the previous Modern Warfare titles.

    I'm being generous giving this game a 3.    … Expand
  10. icarusbird
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    Congratulations on somehow milking more and more money out of each subsequent copy of CoD: Modern Warfare. This game would be more aptly titled "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Ep 3," as it is essentially an expansion pack to the same game we've been playing for four years. Infinity Ward really phoned it on the single-player campaign, and the multiplayer is--yet again--another glorified mapCongratulations on somehow milking more and more money out of each subsequent copy of CoD: Modern Warfare. This game would be more aptly titled "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Ep 3," as it is essentially an expansion pack to the same game we've been playing for four years. Infinity Ward really phoned it on the single-player campaign, and the multiplayer is--yet again--another glorified map expansion and balance tweak. Modern Warfare 3: you get 9 for quality gameplay, minus 2 points for leaving that gameplay unchanged for four years, and minus 3 more points for charging us 60 bucks for the exact same experience. And you know what? Minus one more point for selling us over-priced DLC which was probably finished weeks before the game released.… Expand
  11. mclakers
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    Same game as MW, MW2. short campaign, about 5-6 hrs. I honestly thought it would be a lot better. I should of listened to everyone's users review. Just threw 60 bucks down the drain. I recommend a rental at most.
  12. TheRedZombie
    Nov 21, 2011
    3
    I have been a die-hard CoD fan for years, but I have been growing tired of the series of late. So here it is! I gave this game the low score for many reasons. If Activision expects me to fork over $60 on practically the same game they have been releasing for the last 4 years with nothing more than a new story and minimal tweaks to the multiplayer, than they have seen my last dollar. TheyI have been a die-hard CoD fan for years, but I have been growing tired of the series of late. So here it is! I gave this game the low score for many reasons. If Activision expects me to fork over $60 on practically the same game they have been releasing for the last 4 years with nothing more than a new story and minimal tweaks to the multiplayer, than they have seen my last dollar. They haven't done a single thing to innovate the franchise in years. This franchise has become nothing more than a shameless yearly cash-grab on the behalf of the developers. I won't even get into the CoD elite service which offers nothing gamers haven't seen with games like Halo and Battlefield. At least those two examples don't charge you. The fact that the DLC for this series has become known for overpriced and underwhelming extras has added to my disenfranchisement with the whole series. Plus the fact that game like Deus Ex has released DLC that is longer than the campaign of MW3 is laughable. Activision needs to put this series to bed for a while until they can come up with something substantial to offer the gaming community.… Expand
  13. reaperff7
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    look i'm not going to sit here and tell you guys this game is not without its fun elements. but that does not excuse the fact that the developers didn't even try to improve on the game and that is unacceptable. so if i have to give this game a low score just to nail this idea into their heads then i sure will. i loved black ops, so when i picked this game up i was expecting it to at leastlook i'm not going to sit here and tell you guys this game is not without its fun elements. but that does not excuse the fact that the developers didn't even try to improve on the game and that is unacceptable. so if i have to give this game a low score just to nail this idea into their heads then i sure will. i loved black ops, so when i picked this game up i was expecting it to at least run on the same engine. i was sadly mistaken because this game is ugly, and when i say ugly i mean UGLY! i have no doubt that infinity ward will pick up on this and the many other reviews being posted here and try to make there next game better, but as of now i'm just going to beat this sh***y campaign so i can trade this puppy right back to gamestop.… Expand
  14. mussskitz
    Nov 9, 2011
    3
    I gave the game a low score for a few reasons. I feel that because the damage is so beefed up that the game now doesn't rely on tactics and strategy as it is too strongly now based on reaction time and latency, this issue punishes those of us that don't have super low pings. Tied to the first issue, because the game is so fast my friends who havn't played as much CoD and don't reactI gave the game a low score for a few reasons. I feel that because the damage is so beefed up that the game now doesn't rely on tactics and strategy as it is too strongly now based on reaction time and latency, this issue punishes those of us that don't have super low pings. Tied to the first issue, because the game is so fast my friends who havn't played as much CoD and don't react completely on instinct (there isn't any time to consciously think about your actions) do not enjoy playing the game (so much for 'anyone can pick up and play") which makes it more difficult for me to enjoy. Another issue is team play. IW and SH keep coming up with ways to reward the individual for objective play under the guise that they are promoting "team play". If you want tips on how to promote team play you need only look at BF3. Because the game is so fast now there is no reason to call out to a friend about enemy locations because by the time they are able to react the same enemy has cleared out the room before you could finish the sentence. As far as map design an sniping is concerned... There are very few places you can legitimately snipe. The maps are so tiny that it only lends itself to quick scoping, by and large alienating people who want to kick back, take it a little slower and snipe from range. like normal snipers.

    In my honest opinion. the game needs to be slowed down by reducing damage in general to be somewhere between black ops and MW2.

    There is a reason the user score is so low IW/SH. These are only some of my concerns from my experience. I just hope they are listening.    … Expand
  15. zkalra
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Rehashed Garbage!! I mean come on. If you are going to spend 100 Mil on advertising a steaming pile, at least spend a significant proportion on the actual technology. BF3 really makes this garbage stand out even more. I have had it with these big companies squeezing the last drop of blood from us consumers by selling and hyping junk like this. truly disappointed.
  16. pjd5043
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Even knowing it was going to be a MW2 clone, the game managed to disappoint me. The single player was entertaining enough, although combating the never ending horde of enemies that spawn until you progress past a certain point is getting old. I would have liked the campaign to have been longer, the story was good but the campaign was just way to short.

    The multiplayer is where I the    Even knowing it was going to be a MW2 clone, the game managed to disappoint me. The single player was entertaining enough, although combating the never ending horde of enemies that spawn until you progress past a certain point is getting old. I would have liked the campaign to have been longer, the story was good but the campaign was just way to short.

    The multiplayer is where I the game disappointed me the most, and that's saying something from the already low expectations I had. Spawns are ridiculous in the game, after playing the multiplayer for a few hours, it astonishes me how often I kill someone to have them spawn behind me, or how often I spawn in an enemies path. The maps are all tiny full of winding corridors and very little open space. The guns respond terribly, and they all behave similarly (i.e. fire rate and stopping power). Kills come extremely easy, both ways, and take very little skill. Have had a few problems with lag so far, and it's not on my end, it's not that bad yet, but knowing the previous titles it will get worse with time. To me the multiplayer is just a chaotic mess, more akin to Halo than the COD titles I used to love playing. I give this a 3, because that's how many hours the campaign kept me entertained.    … Expand
  17. smashcore
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    I'm sorely disappointed in the multiplayer. After playing both BF3 and MW3 multiplayer, BF3 is in my opinion the superior of the two.

    Graphically MW3 hasn't changed much while BF3 adds a new level of realism. Sound wise, and this is the first thing I noticed as soon as I started playing MW3 multiplayer, MW3 is dull. Every time the weapon fired it just kinda sounded like thuds to me. BF3    I'm sorely disappointed in the multiplayer. After playing both BF3 and MW3 multiplayer, BF3 is in my opinion the superior of the two.

    Graphically MW3 hasn't changed much while BF3 adds a new level of realism.

    Sound wise, and this is the first thing I noticed as soon as I started playing MW3 multiplayer, MW3 is dull. Every time the weapon fired it just kinda sounded like thuds to me. BF3 sound seems to have that special sharpness and crack when a weapon or explosion goes off.

    The maps, oh the maps..., are the exact same thing I've seen in MW for a while now. Each one is just laid out different and with different textures. Actually trying to use knowledge of the map to your advantage fails horribly because by the time you try to circle around any enemy they are either gone or already killed by the fast paced nature of things.

    The list of game modes available, while impressive, still lack ways to differentiate from each one, mostly due to the lack of map uniqueness.

    The only thing that saves it for me is the single player campaign.    … Expand
  18. Antitu
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Another year, another COD: and every new COD is worst than previous. MWF3 is repetitive, the 6 hour campaign is too short, and the multiplayer adds nothing new.
  19. ChuGNutS
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Its a MW2 expansion pack. End of. XP/ranks/kill streaks = the decline of skill in FPS and the 'run round like a noob' 'spawn die spawn die spawn die' mentality that ruins this game. No tactics No skill its an arcade game that doesnt come close to the likes of Counter Strike.
  20. CaSsh
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    By the way, if ya haven't noticed already..ONLY the critics of companies that receive money, gifts and prizes from call of duty gave this game a 100 overall rating..

    ..p.s...I've never EVER played ANY battlefield games, strictly Call Of Duty..
  21. Kailurisu
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    I don't normally bother to review games, but after seeing Glen Schofields call to gamers to review the game, I figured, I would give him exactly what he wants/needs, but he won't like it. So here is the deal, I bought this game for the multiplayer, who didn't, it doesnt mean I won't play single player or anything else, just that my main goal is to enjoy multiplayer. CoD has offered a veryI don't normally bother to review games, but after seeing Glen Schofields call to gamers to review the game, I figured, I would give him exactly what he wants/needs, but he won't like it. So here is the deal, I bought this game for the multiplayer, who didn't, it doesnt mean I won't play single player or anything else, just that my main goal is to enjoy multiplayer. CoD has offered a very specific flavor of multiplayer that I have enjoyed, but this iteration actually felt off, not quite as good as MW2 or Black Ops. More importantly, the maps for multiplayer, are bland, mostly too hectic and feel ugly. I haven't found a single map that I have enjoyed greatly. That is not a good start. Even remade maps would have served better. The Single player so far is boring, disjointed, and already I feel disconnected from the characters I love, Soap and Price. They don't have the same flavor, and the (SPOILER) guy meant to protect the Russian president being shot by Makarov..... that felt rehashed and boring, I'm not sure I will even bother finishing single player. Survival has been enjoyable, but its just like another form of zombies, good but in the end nothing unique at all. In the end Ill play it, probably more then it would seemed based on my review, a little hypocritical I know. However, I already know now that BF3 for me has taken over the joy that I once held for the CoD series. It seems treating your stars like crap, forcing them to leave, and throwing random **** barely tested developers on a much loved series is just not a good idea. (No offense to Treyarch, they at least seemed to try and did ok)… Expand
  22. ad00m
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Maps are too maze-like close-combat maps. I really havent imagined yet how this differs from MW2 other than the couple odd new killstreaks. I actually paid 60â
  23. jmugg
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    I've enjoyed the story that MW has given us with all three games and I think MW3 is a good wrap up for this story line. Let's be honest though a good majority of people purchase this game for the multiplayer. Being that MW3 used the same engine and nearly all the same people worked on the game I expected it to be similar to MW2 for the most part. Maybe a MW2.5 even, and I was ok with thatI've enjoyed the story that MW has given us with all three games and I think MW3 is a good wrap up for this story line. Let's be honest though a good majority of people purchase this game for the multiplayer. Being that MW3 used the same engine and nearly all the same people worked on the game I expected it to be similar to MW2 for the most part. Maybe a MW2.5 even, and I was ok with that because the maps and the game play were really solid. You had a good mix of maps, meaning that the cartography of the maps were balanced in what you could do. If you liked run and gun you could play that style. If you liked to snipe, the map layouts on some maps were brilliant for that but they did include areas that you could run and gun. One map like this would be Fuel in MW2...minus the rock you could hide in obviously. Fast forward to today and as someone that enjoyed sniping, I feel that the cartography of the maps in MW3 are so boxy and corridor like that the only style of play style that is effective is run and gun. The elevation difference in the maps just doesn't seem to be that of the MW2 map Estate or in MW Creek. I'm not saying there needs to be open maps like MW2 Wasteland but maps like Fuel, Creek, Estate, High Rise, Afghan, Derail, Rundown and Underpass would be nice to have in the multiplayer. I feel like those maps had more of an organic feel to them and there were wide open areas and some not so open areas so you could snipe if you wanted but you could also run and gun. This lack of elevation change makes a lot of the multiplayer maps seem like the same thing over and over again just difference scenery. Out of the current set of maps there isn't one that I feel has that, oh this is going to be a classic map down the road and that isn't good from a multiplayer standpoint. Hopefully with DLC they can go back to the drawing board and rethink their cartography to give the maps a bit more of what they did in past games.… Expand
  24. Zenrir
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Typical CoD really. I've played them all since the first Call Of Duty on PC! And for MW3 the single player was awesome, i loved the story to it, the scripted scenes were wicked. I did like the multiplayer up until i realised i can't choose what god damn attachment i want. I have to level the gun up to like level 20? Just for a sight? Come on Black Ops had a much better system along withTypical CoD really. I've played them all since the first Call Of Duty on PC! And for MW3 the single player was awesome, i loved the story to it, the scripted scenes were wicked. I did like the multiplayer up until i realised i can't choose what god damn attachment i want. I have to level the gun up to like level 20? Just for a sight? Come on Black Ops had a much better system along with custom emblems. As for Spec-Ops well... the missions are alright. Lacking in variety though. The survival is abysmal. the air support is very very limited. as are the maps. The delta squads die within minutes and you have no gas mask to stop the chemical warfare. It's ridiculous. Zombies was much more balanced. Sort it out IW.… Expand
  25. ckyleburnett
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Logged about 10 hours into multiplayer. Absolute rubbish. This is a complete misstep for the series and utterly unforgivable. this is a horrid entry into the series. In one match i was playing last night, a sniper looks up into the sky to lob a grenade into the air..no problem there, but without bothering to even look down - he TAPS the L-trigger followed immediately by the fire button.Logged about 10 hours into multiplayer. Absolute rubbish. This is a complete misstep for the series and utterly unforgivable. this is a horrid entry into the series. In one match i was playing last night, a sniper looks up into the sky to lob a grenade into the air..no problem there, but without bothering to even look down - he TAPS the L-trigger followed immediately by the fire button. the view from his scope was looking directly up at the sky but somehow, the bullet managed to take a 45degree turn and result in a head show. Seriously - he was looking at the fricking sky!!! unreal, simply unreal. I have never felt so ripped off from a game in my entire life. DO NOT BUY.
    If you are a COD fan, stick to Black Ops - its far superior, or even Modern Warfare 2. The gameplay is not fluid and there is no real since of "flow" to the action. Enemies commonly spawn right next to you. Maps are extra small and none of them really stick out as being memorable.
    I haven't tried single player and very limited time with Spec Ops but what I have played i did like. probably the only decent parts of the game.    … Expand
  26. rizzah
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    The multiplayer has taken a real downward spiral since mw2. The maps are small and are nothing more than run and gun. They no longer take skill and limits the value of alot of the weaponry.
  27. Novato1979
    Nov 16, 2011
    3
    The same graphics, same game play, everything is the same, not innovation, not fun. if i want to play COD i think my best option still COD:MW2 for far...
  28. MoldedCrumb8
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Sure the single-player is fun. Its a Shooter and you are shooting stuff all the time, no? But then again, I find myself on the 3rd game of the series asking who the **** these characters are and why should I care about them. The 4 hour campaign story is non existant, and we all know most of the people just dont give a **** about it (most dont even play it after hundreds of hours ofSure the single-player is fun. Its a Shooter and you are shooting stuff all the time, no? But then again, I find myself on the 3rd game of the series asking who the **** these characters are and why should I care about them. The 4 hour campaign story is non existant, and we all know most of the people just dont give a **** about it (most dont even play it after hundreds of hours of multiplayer action, and that happens on every CoD).. its a multiplayer focused game after all.
    But of course, the multiplayer has always been the same. What has changed since MW1? Some new maps? Some new guns and perks? The co-ops are nice though.
    I just dont think what im getting is worth another 60$. We used to joke that every modern shooter is the same.. but the MW series takes it to a new level. Sure it works, its fun to play and stuff, but If I already own MW1 and 2, I dont feel a real need to run to the store to get this.    … Expand
  29. bmilson74
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Online is where it fails this time around, maps all seem like the previous map. They don't seem to have variety and reuse elements from previous games. Single player seems to be the easiest one yet. The game seems to be geared towards keeping the casual player playing this buying all of the DLC. Made only for money. Now where do I review Elite?
  30. badt
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    yes am a bf3 fan boy, but this is not compared to mw3 in any way. Its just a bad, boring game. After 2 hours i traded it in. Campaign too short, on-line is painful, but the other modes are fine but never seen myself going back after one full run-though. MW3 = Money Wasted 3
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 »