Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

 Xbox 360
User Score
3.5

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 8685 Ratings

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

Review this game

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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


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

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

    Record the voice acting


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

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



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


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



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


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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Another character I couldn't care less about is Yuri, another faceless, voiceless nobody who you play through the (let's face it, better) task force 141 campaign. It seems like a real mis-step after having played the brilliantly paced back end of MW2 as Soap, to dump you in the body of someone else to view him from afar. It's not that I'm in love with Soap, I just admire the budding bro-mance between him and Price, and to have to sit as the third wheel watching that manly love blossom kills me. So that's a some of the bad out of the way (I can't be bothered to point out the obvious that killing wave after wave of identi-kit bad guys until you reach the checkpoint that magically halts their spawn gets real boring real quick) I'll move on to the good, and that is the set pieces. They are parts of this game that still have some magic left. A personal favourite was scuttling and hijacking a Russian nuclear sub, using it's missiles to sink the rest of the Russian fleet and then escaping on a Zodiac and driving (do you drive a boat?) right into the loading bay of a waiting helicopter. It was a spectacle and handled in a way that made you feel pretty bad ass, but that was ten bright, shiny minutes from an hours grey and boring gameplay. And that's why this game deserves such a low score, for every stand out moment there's 5 dull missions you drudge through as quickly as you can to try to get to them. This game isn't a revolution, it isn't even a evolution of the previous titles, it's emulation of MW's much earlier greats and that's why those calling it Modern Warfare 2.5 have summed this game up better than I ever could.    … Expand
  30. HachiMana
    Nov 9, 2011
    1
    This is an eye destroyer.
    The FOV is just ridicules.
    MW3 is just MW2.5... the game gives nothing new to the genre and looks so poor.
    If Activision are smart they will create a new game and make it good enough to compete with BF.
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 »