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. zgillet
    Nov 15, 2011
    3
    I'm mainly giving this bad review to piss off the elitist professional reviewers that are **** about the user score on here.

    This score is indicative of gamers being tired of the same old thing.
  2. JJnSWhiskyGirl
    Nov 15, 2011
    3
    This game is basically MW2 with a few added bells and whistles (that might I add are not worth $60, and then if you don't pay the extra $50 for the Elite service you are wasting even more money). The quick scoping on this game seems to have been made easier, which I personally find annoying. I would have liked it to be more challenging. The campaign is pretty good, but it's not worthThis game is basically MW2 with a few added bells and whistles (that might I add are not worth $60, and then if you don't pay the extra $50 for the Elite service you are wasting even more money). The quick scoping on this game seems to have been made easier, which I personally find annoying. I would have liked it to be more challenging. The campaign is pretty good, but it's not worth buying the game for it.
    I'm sticking to COD and returning both of my copies today, and trading them in for Skyrim. What a waste of our hard earned money!    … Expand
  3. MrBrown
    Nov 15, 2011
    3
    A twitchy, fast paced arcade style online shooter component--if that is your thing--is the only highlight to this game. Otherwise, if you are playing it for the single player, this game has NO longevity. Call it novelty, but I absolutely loved COD4. MW2 made everything so fast paced and that trend continues with this game. Honestly, millions of fan(boy)s love this game. Maybe I'm the oddA twitchy, fast paced arcade style online shooter component--if that is your thing--is the only highlight to this game. Otherwise, if you are playing it for the single player, this game has NO longevity. Call it novelty, but I absolutely loved COD4. MW2 made everything so fast paced and that trend continues with this game. Honestly, millions of fan(boy)s love this game. Maybe I'm the odd one for not liking it. Again, if you have a military shooter fetish then there is nothing like it on the market, besides maybe Battlefield. Rent before you buy to see if it's your thing.… Expand
  4. vesperiaLSU
    Nov 15, 2011
    3
    The single player campaign didn't really live up to the expectation given what MW2 has already accomplished. The World War 3 concept and some of the big moments may keep you excited for the first 2 or 3 hours, but the rest parts of the campaign mostly felt repetitive and lackluster. The story wasn't well told, and I didn't bother to finish the campaign even though seeing the ending of theThe single player campaign didn't really live up to the expectation given what MW2 has already accomplished. The World War 3 concept and some of the big moments may keep you excited for the first 2 or 3 hours, but the rest parts of the campaign mostly felt repetitive and lackluster. The story wasn't well told, and I didn't bother to finish the campaign even though seeing the ending of the story is a big incentive of me playing this game. Multiplayer neither surprised me nor made any major mistake, but the obvious deficiency in graphics and sounds did make this series look old, especially while BF3 is doing a great job stunning your eyes.… Expand
  5. Jeffrey519
    Nov 15, 2011
    3
    I had high expectations for this game, not only was it because it was MW3 but there was a new developer behind it. That said, I think you know where this is going...same **** different pile.
  6. rhino61466
    Nov 16, 2011
    3
    Sorry but activision and IW should not get $60 for this game! This is MW 2.5! A glorified expansion with no creative or innovative improvements. Everything was copied and pasted from a game that came before it. MW was epic and ground breaking but MW3 is about four years old when it came out and def not worth more than a 6.
  7. Kevin-Blueberry
    Dec 4, 2011
    3
    The first thing you'll notice when you start Modern Warfare 3 is, wow, people weren't kidding, this game really looks just like Modern Warfare 2. And that is because this game was developped in a year. Remember Call of Duty 3? That was developped in a year and look how that turned out. The game re-uses the Modern Warfare 2 engine with a glitter on top. The campaign tries to be good withThe first thing you'll notice when you start Modern Warfare 3 is, wow, people weren't kidding, this game really looks just like Modern Warfare 2. And that is because this game was developped in a year. Remember Call of Duty 3? That was developped in a year and look how that turned out. The game re-uses the Modern Warfare 2 engine with a glitter on top. The campaign tries to be good with epic moments and a key character's death, but it really doesn't work. I found myself, like with previous Call of Duty titles, pushing myself to play the campaign, rather than wanting to. And, the ending isn't nearly as satisfying as it should be. Then there's Spec Ops, which can be played in co-op, or if you don't know another human, alone. The missions are basically the same as Modern Warfare 2, not too interesting, but still somewhat satisfying to beat. There's also survival which is just a two-player, simplified zombie mode, and really isn't that great. It's not as in-depth as zombies was, and due to only two players, not nearly as exciting. But, of course with any first-person shooter, the main component is multi-player, and while it may be decent, it's surely not worth $60. There's a couple new game modes like Team Defender (TDM, with a grabbable flag that doubles team score) and Kill Confirmed (when a player dies, they drop dog tags, grab these to score points). As with every Call fo Duty title, it tries to reel you in with new guns, perks and killstreaks, making you think it was a $60 well spent. The guns as usual are fairly unbalanced, you have overpowered weapons (like the Type 95, RIOT shield and pretty much any gun with a modded controller) and useless guns (like the M16A4, LMG's and shotguns). There are some cool guns like an air burst grenade launcher, but like the crossbow/ballistic knife (Black Ops) and Javelin , they're just pointless additions in a poor cry for attention. There aren't any new, interesting perks, besides Cold Blooded being split into two perks (which many people complained that it was overpowered in Black Ops). Killstreaks are the only really revamped feature. There are three types of killstreaks now: Assault (Kill-based, helicopters, airstrikes, missiles etc.), Support (UAV's, EMP's, Stealth Bombers etc., this streak doesn't end unless you switch classes) and Specialist (Get a new perk at certain intervals). While Support had the right idea, encouraging players to rush objectives for score as soon as possible, without worrying about dying. This encouraged players to keep moving and help their team as much as possible. However, Assault and Specialist still pose the issue of camping, rewarding players with overpowered items for staying alive is a clear issue, as it's much easier to stay alive while sitting in a corner, then when sitting, exposed, on an objective. Thus, with the inclusion of the Support Strike Package, there is less camping, but it's still an issue with the other Strike Packages, which generally offer better, kill-based, rewards. The multiplayer is still fast-paced, but actually too much so. You still spawn out of your enemies' asses so you can insta-kill knife them in the back, or get knifed yourself. Objectives are still ignored by the majority fo players, who are more interested in stacking killstreaks and maintaining a high KD ratio. And if you're looking for a team-based game, look away. Don't be fooled by the team modes, there is no teamwork required to succeed in this game, and more times then not, rather then being helped by teammates, you're being called a **** and told to kill yourself for "getting in his way". Call of Duty is getting stale, there are hardly any worthwhile additions each year, if you're lookign for a fun game to play with friends, go get Halo: Reach or Battlefield 3. The private matches offer a few new options, but in the end, are less customizable then Black Ops was, and custom games in Halo are still much better, no contest. The game promotes camping, is the same with a new coat of paint as the last entry (every year, not just Mw3) and really isn't any fun anymore. I would love to see a Call of Duty title that took more than a couple years of work, has a lot of new, worthwhile entries and really reworks the entire multiplayer system. Is Modern Warfare 3 worth buying? If you have Modern Warfare 2 or Black Ops, there's no reason to spend $60 on this, I learned that the hard way. If you're looking for a new game, go check out Battlefield 3. It has learning curve, but give it a chance, it's much more worthy of your hard-earned money than this rushed, and under-developped expansion pack for a two-year old game.… Expand
  8. triski
    Nov 17, 2011
    3
    Ive given this game a couple of weeks before I made a review or judgement about it. I will go through each aspect of the game, MW3 is the sequel to MW2 but has been released after black ops as part of the two year cycle, and with its release after black ops one would expect similar improvements on the previous game but MW3 looks almost identical to MW2. For the most part the gameplay isIve given this game a couple of weeks before I made a review or judgement about it. I will go through each aspect of the game, MW3 is the sequel to MW2 but has been released after black ops as part of the two year cycle, and with its release after black ops one would expect similar improvements on the previous game but MW3 looks almost identical to MW2. For the most part the gameplay is very similar to MW2. In Black ops (multiplayer) we could change in game sound settings, e.g turn game music off, choose type of sound system (headset, 5.1, 2.1 etc...) we never were able to do that with MW2 and its the same with MW3. Why on earth can we not change that? Black ops would allow us to turn the aim assist off (so did world at war), MW2 didnt and neither does MW3, I mean why cant I chose to disable it? I have been a call of duty fan since the first one many years ago and have since loyally purchased every game since, but this is where the line has to be drawn. Many people will not know Infinity Ward had lost many employees during the days of MW2 and since had to merge with another game developer, which was not an issue, but there are real signs of lazy work. Apart from what I have mentioned, there are some buildings which have been directly copied from Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare 1 and these buildings have had graphical updates. The voice chat quality online is horrible, black ops implemented an update which used the new HD codec provided by Mircosoft (a few months after black ops was released) so why did this update not make it to MW3? Again this is another copy any paste job by the looks of it. Im sure many will remember the hacks in MW2, 10th prestige lobbys, god mode etc...well clan tag hacks are back in MW3 and so are the worse ones (check certain forums). Modders have the exact same hacks running on MW3 which are not yet public but will soon be. I spoke to a casual gamer friend who previously purchased MW2 and black ops, when he first played MW3 his first comment was "Its exactly the same as MW2", he then stated his desire not to purchase the game. Im not a BF3 fanboy, I have a youtube channel with all sorts of games/gameplay and MW3 might be the best selling game of all time but its not worth the money I have paid for it. The only thing I can commend this game in the multiplayer realm is the fact that it is balanced but thats it. There is no innovation, new ideas or even passion when this game was created. The gameplay is good but I persoanlly dont think its worth the investment, I would suggest playing other games that have been released recently like batman, assassins creed, saints row. Those games will provide a decent experience because there will be an underwhelming feeling after playing this, Im already bored of it. I do not troll as I am trying to become a fair games journalist, but the review sites get paid off to give good reviews of games. MW3 deserves a very low score due to the lack of change or improvement but mainly because of the laziness of the developer who has clearly copied and pasted many aspects from previous games. All I can do is enjoy the other games out there and wait for GTA V.… Expand
  9. UnknownTru7h
    Nov 17, 2011
    3
    They claim to have "redefined" their engine, and little to nothing has changed. They do nothing but give us the some crap every time, I've lost my respect for them.
  10. FailingCodMilke
    Nov 17, 2011
    3
    Let's start with: 1: They spelled the name right so that's 1 point
    2: Milking call of duty to the bone and further = -5 points
    3: Charging 50 euro's for it = bad = -2
    4: Overall without looking at the above 3 points it's a very awesome game: graphics 8, gameplay 9, sound 9, replay value single player 3, replay value multiplayer 8.

    Overall 1 - 5 - 2 + 8.5 (avg) = 2.5 = 3
  11. CerberusAdept
    Nov 17, 2011
    3
    As a fan of the Call of Duty series and a particular supporter of the Modern Warfare series it was with great anticipation that I eagerly awaited the third instalment. The original game was a genre-defining masterpiece, and whilst the second chapter never lived up to that standard, still it was far from a poor game. That being the case it would take something very special indeed toAs a fan of the Call of Duty series and a particular supporter of the Modern Warfare series it was with great anticipation that I eagerly awaited the third instalment. The original game was a genre-defining masterpiece, and whilst the second chapter never lived up to that standard, still it was far from a poor game. That being the case it would take something very special indeed to disappoint this time around surely. Sadly, that's exactly what we got, an incredibly disappointing game that bears no relation to the games that have preceded it. It is a pale imitation of the former glories of the Modern Warfare series, a very cheap knock-off. There are three core elements of gameplay;

    1. Single player campaign - this is actually pretty good, and in most ways is actually far superior to the campaign in Modern Warfare 2. Gameplay is varied to a degree, and a satisfying resolution to the story started in CoD4 is provided. 2. Spec-Ops (co-op) - what they'd done here is take the spec-ops missions from Modern Warfare 2 and split it out - half of the game is the traditional spec-ops objective-based missions, the other half, "survival" is a poor attempt at a Modern Warfare equivalent of Treyarch's "zombie mode". I'm afraid it's incredibly dull and loses what little appeal it has very quickly. It's incredibly easy and you'll find yourself getting to round 20 before it even starts to provide a challenge. 3. Multiplayer Campaign - frankly, this is why most people buy these games, and I'm afraid Modern Warfare is a complete and utter mess. If you bought into the hype then it sounded great - no game-ending nuke, no infinite sprint, no infinite noob-tubes via OMA (in fact noob-tubes were even going to be nerfed!), gone was the commando 'death lunge/stab' - it sounded great. Unfortunately, it's all irrelevant. The maps are incredibly mundane with little variety. Judged against their CoD4 and MW2 counterparts they're incredibly poorly designed. That's just the start of the problems - hit detection appears to be way off. Again. You'll find yourself shot around corners far more often than you've ever been before on any of the other CoD games. There's also an extraordinary amount of lag, particularly when you're hosting. Rumours abound of 'lag compensation' which automatically screws whoever is hosting. Whether or not this is true, I don't know. I just know that when I'm hosting, it says I've got a 4 bar connection, yet the lag makes it almost unplayable. In conclusion, after this shambles of a game I can't seriously see myself buying another CoD game. Activision clearly couldn't care less about fans, otherwise they'd never have let fake IW and Sledgehammer games get away with such shoddy testing. Any amount of focused testing should have driven out all of the issues that currently blight the game. The fact that they're in there leads you to wonder if they even bothered to test it at all. A terrible game that barely deserves to be considered a Call of Duty game. Activision should be ashamed that they've hoodwinked so many people into buying what is essentially a broken game.    … Expand
  12. Siiselizx
    Nov 17, 2011
    3
    Until patches start to roll out (hopefully) this game is sub bar. It has unbalanced perks/guns, lag issues, map glitching, horrible matchmaking system and awful maps. Add CoD elite not working 95% of the time to that mix, and you got one big mess in your hands. Only good part in the game is Survival mode in spec ops. Even single player is this time dull and boring.
  13. Ratedr4000
    Nov 18, 2011
    3
    Another year, another COD game. I made a good decision by playing this game at a friend's house first instead of running out and buying it like every other person would. It's a good thing too because this game has the same tiresome formula as the rest. The campaign is still the short and action packed thrill ride as MW2 which was OK to play through. The multiplayer, however, is whatAnother year, another COD game. I made a good decision by playing this game at a friend's house first instead of running out and buying it like every other person would. It's a good thing too because this game has the same tiresome formula as the rest. The campaign is still the short and action packed thrill ride as MW2 which was OK to play through. The multiplayer, however, is what they took a big step backwards on. The maps are completely uninspired with the spawn points being far worse than the predecessors. The graphics and the gun sounds are recycled from previous games (even cod4). The hit detection is far worse than MW2. If you still enjoy Call of Duty, you're better off saving 60 bucks and continuing to play MW2 or cod4. The developers still fail to innovate. A new streak system, very few new perks, and a survival mode that resembles Zombies is just no reason to buy this game. By the way, Activision already announced a new Call of Duty game for 2012. It'll be just like the rest.… Expand
  14. toddimuspme
    Nov 20, 2011
    3
    I am not big on multipalyer I'll admit that but for 60 dollars I expect more from the single player than this crap. Both other modern warfare games have better single players and black ops is even better and yes every call of duty ever released has a better single player so the how about graphics? Black ops last years call of duty has much better graphics I think this one is just on parI am not big on multipalyer I'll admit that but for 60 dollars I expect more from the single player than this crap. Both other modern warfare games have better single players and black ops is even better and yes every call of duty ever released has a better single player so the how about graphics? Black ops last years call of duty has much better graphics I think this one is just on par with mw2 so pretty dated for this one. So activision why is this not just dlc instead of a new game? Controls are fine but I gave this a 3 because it is not worth the money period. How about next activison insted of putting one out every year you give us a great release in two. People unless you are a die hard call of duty fan SKIP THIS TITLE there are better games out there to spend your money on.… Expand
  15. Feryll
    Nov 20, 2011
    3
    Easily forgettable short campaign
    Lack originality Using the same IW4 engine that has been used for the last few years, no effort put in at all to graphics and gameplay.
    Multiplayer very arcadey but a fun distraction from the rest of game.
    Call of duty is quickly becoming the justin bieber of video games, very popular but with very little substance
  16. Glasses
    Nov 20, 2011
    3
    Call of Duty MW3 is one of the most over-hyped and overrated games of this gen alongside Battlefield 3. Cod MW3 is supposed to be a sequel to MW2, but it offers nothing new to the table. People are suckered into buying the same game ever year or two years, not knowing the fact that nothing has changed. It's still the same old shoot and kill game we've seen a thousand times. The creators ofCall of Duty MW3 is one of the most over-hyped and overrated games of this gen alongside Battlefield 3. Cod MW3 is supposed to be a sequel to MW2, but it offers nothing new to the table. People are suckered into buying the same game ever year or two years, not knowing the fact that nothing has changed. It's still the same old shoot and kill game we've seen a thousand times. The creators of the game need to learn the definition of the word "innovation" before they can make another Cod game. I cannot give this game higher than a 3/10 since it's just MW2 with a few more maps… Expand
  17. 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.
  18. MyCriticReview
    Nov 20, 2011
    3
    Presentation
    An average presentation, with the best campaign in the series to date. But the campaign's story, gameplay, and sound are the worse of the franchise.
    Graphics Once again, graphics are one of the highlights of the game, with more detailed textures then ever before in the series. But texture depth and shadowing continues to not be touched even the slightest. Sound The music    Presentation
    An average presentation, with the best campaign in the series to date. But the campaign's story, gameplay, and sound are the worse of the franchise.

    Graphics
    Once again, graphics are one of the highlights of the game, with more detailed textures then ever before in the series. But texture depth and shadowing continues to not be touched even the slightest.

    Sound
    The music score is average for the gaming industry. Weapon sounds are the worst of the series and contain little to no depth. Sound blending is also poor and could use more options in menus. Voice acting is well done.

    Gameplay
    As stated in presentation, the campaign story is not very good, but the environments are varied and detailed. The developers should have taken some cues from the last game of the franchise and removed the action button prompt in cutscenes; it ruins the flow of the game. The multiplayer is well balanced, but contains so many lag related issues it is unplayable competitively. Spec Ops is improved with more missions and survival mode.

    Lasting Appeal
    Fans craving more of the same will be satisfied but with so many lag related issues in multiplayer, the lasting appeal is virtually gone.    … Expand
  19. silverbeard
    Nov 21, 2011
    3
    After reading the "Metacritic" article posted on IGN. I had. No. Must. Do my part to discourage any sequels or prequels to this franchise. I must begin by saying i have not played this game. But i have played and purchased the previous 'Call of Duty' games. I hear all they changed was the "3" on the title. They even cut copied pictures from the previous title onto the jacket. Therefore iAfter reading the "Metacritic" article posted on IGN. I had. No. Must. Do my part to discourage any sequels or prequels to this franchise. I must begin by saying i have not played this game. But i have played and purchased the previous 'Call of Duty' games. I hear all they changed was the "3" on the title. They even cut copied pictures from the previous title onto the jacket. Therefore i give it 3 out of 10. It is the third in the series after all. Do not purchase. I have not. Or next year we will be playing "Call of Guitar Hero: DJ warfare 6"… Expand
  20. newb1e
    Nov 21, 2011
    3
    What we see? Nothing new since Modern Warfare 2, but it doesn't meant that MW 2 is amazing. Why? Because best game in series Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare with gorgeous tuned game engine, great control and movement in multiplayer. Developers finally purchase id Tech 5 and build new game on IW 1.1 in my dreams.
  21. nerdybeats
    Nov 21, 2011
    3
    Was going to defend this game against all the haters, but i **** can't believe how bad this game actually is. Its fun but not when the server connections are HORRIBLE, dont say i have crappy net because black ops and mw2 are fine, the maps are TERRIBLE, i only like 2 maps out of 16... and the **** stupid as random hit detection, its either a 1 hit kill or a 3 hit kill? wtf make up yourWas going to defend this game against all the haters, but i **** can't believe how bad this game actually is. Its fun but not when the server connections are HORRIBLE, dont say i have crappy net because black ops and mw2 are fine, the maps are TERRIBLE, i only like 2 maps out of 16... and the **** stupid as random hit detection, its either a 1 hit kill or a 3 hit kill? wtf make up your mind and no i didnt hit the leg or anything i am VERY sure as i always try to aim for the head . Geeez… Expand
  22. IDontKnowWho
    Nov 21, 2011
    3
    COD 4 was a good game. It had every aspect for a good few years. The problem with the sequels is that there is not much to update or add. MW2 was good as well but i though that the game play was getting repetitive. Its basically COD 4 with new guns and a new campaign. At this point infinity ward is having a 4 year hangover thinking that as long as it has the Modern Warfare name, it willCOD 4 was a good game. It had every aspect for a good few years. The problem with the sequels is that there is not much to update or add. MW2 was good as well but i though that the game play was getting repetitive. Its basically COD 4 with new guns and a new campaign. At this point infinity ward is having a 4 year hangover thinking that as long as it has the Modern Warfare name, it will sell. I am not the only one thinking about leaving COD for Halo or Battlefield. The campaign was disappointing because it was highly predictable. The multiplayer has become boring. Plus since there was a minimum change in mechanics, the best players are still the best and there is no chance for new players to play and enjoy it. There is absolutely no reason to pick up this game or the next to come if it will be the same year after year.… Expand
  23. ploeg8393
    Nov 21, 2011
    3
    Shouldn't this be MW2.1?

    The critics are obviously a bunch of idiots that got paid to review the game highly. The campaign was disappointing, i can't even remember any of the missions, none stand out. The multiplayer brings back the problems of MW2 like quick scoping, bad spawning and sniping across the map with a pistol. It doesn't help that the maps are the size of a cubical but have    Shouldn't this be MW2.1?

    The critics are obviously a bunch of idiots that got paid to review the game highly. The campaign was disappointing, i can't even remember any of the missions, none stand out. The multiplayer brings back the problems of MW2 like quick scoping, bad spawning and sniping across the map with a pistol. It doesn't help that the maps are the size of a cubical but have 2 or 3 levels to hit your form across the map.

    Black ops is a far superior game than 2 or 3. I am trying my hardest to say that i like this game but i think i am in denial.    … Expand
  24. badmonkey35
    Nov 21, 2011
    3
    I own every COD ever made and have enjoyed them all up to this one. The main menu looks cheap and dated like a 10 year old game. Halo CE menu looked nicer on the Xbox. Killstreaks now called Strike Package will carry over if you die if you pick support. The character animation looks real bad at times. Sometimes when I get killed my player goes flying back several feet like he gotI own every COD ever made and have enjoyed them all up to this one. The main menu looks cheap and dated like a 10 year old game. Halo CE menu looked nicer on the Xbox. Killstreaks now called Strike Package will carry over if you die if you pick support. The character animation looks real bad at times. Sometimes when I get killed my player goes flying back several feet like he got nubetubed or hit a claymore. Only to find out I just got shot by a rifle or sub machine gun. The lag is read bad at times. When you look at a kill cam half the time itâ… Expand
  25. BlurOfBlaze
    Nov 22, 2011
    3
    I rented this game hoping it would not turn out to be a load of crap like previous games like black ops or world at war, hoping they would fix all the obvious errors they had from modern warfare 2 and as I start playing I start to realize same graphics, same engine and same crap of a game.
  26. Aerodyll
    Nov 22, 2011
    3
    This game would be awesome if it would only let me play it. Multiplayer has server issues that have completely crippled my ability to play the game, i may get into one game a day and even then im lucky if the servers dontcrash and wipe my progress. I have contacted Activision about this and they havent even bothered to help me or any of the other poeple with the same issues. In short thisThis game would be awesome if it would only let me play it. Multiplayer has server issues that have completely crippled my ability to play the game, i may get into one game a day and even then im lucky if the servers dontcrash and wipe my progress. I have contacted Activision about this and they havent even bothered to help me or any of the other poeple with the same issues. In short this game had potential but should not have been released in this state. Im not an unreasonable person but this makes me think f*ck Activision. I wont be buying any of their games on release any more.

    The single player is OK but nothing great, they basically rip off MW2 and lets not forget in MW2 they basiucally ripped off MW1. I got the game based on the previous games but honestly this time round they just copied the previous game and changed names and places. The ending is complete tosh too, I didnt even realise it was the end until the credits rolled. To sum up, average single player, great multiuplayer if it would only f*cking work. Overall I have lost faith in Activision and the COD series, I actually hope this is the last nail in the coffin as if they think they can get away with this they are even biger **** than I already thought they where.    … Expand
  27. Danteasdfgh
    Nov 23, 2011
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have played the entire camping by now and I got to say it is a medium good just because it's for my taste too short, the use a improve version the same engine used in MW2 so yes, I'm disappointed that they didn't improve the history, I like playing online but this shouldn't be the only reason why they pull this disaster out, the multilayer has improve and I'm giving that to COD, the sound, come on this doesn't sound real at all, a little improvement in that would be nice. But why they don't just launch the game as the older battlefield series without the trouble of camping, so let just finish with this with a small summary:

    Camping 2
    Multilayer 7
    Graphics 7
    Sound 0 just because didn't improve at all.

    so that is how I see things.    … Expand
  28. areviewer
    Nov 23, 2011
    3
    im gonna start off by saying this game isnt bad, it just isnt good, another instagib gamer with snowballing killstreaks that just uses the same old formula to make a game with the same ol same ol, the multiplayer isnt a step up from MW2 or blackops but at the same time isnt a step up, it still has the same imbalanced setups, imbalanced killstreaks and modders and whiners, the campaign isntim gonna start off by saying this game isnt bad, it just isnt good, another instagib gamer with snowballing killstreaks that just uses the same old formula to make a game with the same ol same ol, the multiplayer isnt a step up from MW2 or blackops but at the same time isnt a step up, it still has the same imbalanced setups, imbalanced killstreaks and modders and whiners, the campaign isnt bad and is kinda fun but is rather short and has a very dull and predictable story. if you are a direhard COD fan then this game is for you but the "if it aint broke dont fix it" development model that activision is pursuing has stopped working for me, im glad that i got 50 dollars back for my copy and recommend that anyone who thinks about buying this game think twice… Expand
  29. Gut755
    Nov 27, 2011
    3
    Very big disappointment! This is NOT Modern Warfare 3 this is more like Modern Warfare 2.5! No updates in graphics from Modern Warfare 2. Instead of releasing a new Call of Duty they should have released a downloadable content for new guns and maps cause that basically what that whole game is. One of the good things about this game is Survivor mode is pretty interesting but its basicallyVery big disappointment! This is NOT Modern Warfare 3 this is more like Modern Warfare 2.5! No updates in graphics from Modern Warfare 2. Instead of releasing a new Call of Duty they should have released a downloadable content for new guns and maps cause that basically what that whole game is. One of the good things about this game is Survivor mode is pretty interesting but its basically zombies with guns.
    Only reason people are gonna keep buying this game is because it has the title of Call Of Duty.    … Expand
  30. neuroneinfuga
    Dec 1, 2011
    3
    After spending a couple of days playing the game I can say without any doubt that this could be considered an expansion of Modern Warfare 2, The game is solid, the Campaign is ok and the reviewed perk sistem is a nice addition. Is that enough? I don't think so, year after year we hear about how the call of duty series obliterates record after record in sales. This game in one week hasAfter spending a couple of days playing the game I can say without any doubt that this could be considered an expansion of Modern Warfare 2, The game is solid, the Campaign is ok and the reviewed perk sistem is a nice addition. Is that enough? I don't think so, year after year we hear about how the call of duty series obliterates record after record in sales. This game in one week has profited more than 700 milion dollars, with that much of a profit I think Activision could invest a little more in innovation, making better graphics, bigger maps, adding new variables like ambient distruction or just putting out servers so that we don't lag anymore!
    Another trend that started lately is the lack of free space in a map, why put sniper rifles when there isn't a map built for it, I like snipers, if they're good they help a lot and if they're bad are fun to kill, but bit by bit maps are getting smaller and more crowded every year, with fewer lines of fire, making playing as a sniper impossible.
    My rating for this game is 3, because with all the profits this game could have been so much more than an expansion of it's predecessors    … 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 »