Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Review

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Review

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is much like its predecessors: a bombastic but brief single player campaign coupled with laser-focused multiplayer.

Read Full Article

Crap storm coming :\

Tiscolfo:
Crap storm coming :\

Pretty much. Doesn't matter how good the game actually might be, tons of people who haven't played it will come in and say it's the worst game ever made.

OT: Since I'm not interested in multi-player, I'll probably pick this up after a price drop. Having just finished Modern Warfare 2 a few days ago (I have a massive backlog of games to work through) I gotta say I'm interested to see how it ends and I love the way Modern Warfare does the single player because, love it or hate it, it is pretty much like a big old action movie.

I only own and play MW1, can I just keep doing that instead?

I expected as much - I'm a little put-off by the '4.5 star' ranking, though. That seems a tad generous given the fact that this seems like little more than a rehash of the previous two MW titles.

the images and gameplayed he showed really contrasted from what he said, it honestly looked lackluster and didnt seem like much was new, just sort of re-skinned.

No one's gonna be happy about the reviews. The screaming hardcores will start throwing around GOTY and BEST EVAH! While the head-shaking haters are gonna claim uninspired drivel.

I have no plan on buying the game any time soon. Not as a commentary on its perceived quality or lack thereof, but rather because paying $60 for a game at this point in my life can't be rationalized.

And so it begins. *Sets up a chair*
This should be a gooooooooooooood spectacle.

OT: Good review, although I only read the written review. I don't watch the video reviews. I'm a stickler for written reviews.

The review felt forced--as if the reviewer was forced to be diplomatic by the editor. "The game has enough new features to seem fresh" as opposed to, let's say "staying fresh"? Maybe I'm reading too much into it, I don't know. Was an uncomfortable review to watch.

The 5 hour estimated single player time is generous on its own. I beat the game on Veteran in a little over 7 hours on my first go through the game and I honestly was rather upset at how weak the entire game was. I always enjoyed the Call of Duty series single player for its difficult Veteran mode, but the last couple games have become far too easy in my opinion.

The 4.5 you gave is undermined by your caveat of "if you're not fatigued by the series". A 4.5 should be something that anyone who likes shooters should probably buy. The text itself though, is fine.

maddawg IAJI:
The 5 hour estimated single player time is generous on its own. I beat the game on Veteran in a little over 7 hours on my first go through the game and I honestly was rather upset at how weak the entire game was. I always enjoyed the Call of Duty series single player for its difficult Veteran mode, but the last couple games have become far too easy in my opinion.

Or maybe you got better ;) I know I died a lot on the normal difficulty > . >

Personally, I enjoyed the single player and felt annoyed that many reviewers just ignore this portion of the game to spend the entire review talking about how the multiplayer is the same or how the graphics are not pushing your PC to limit or even failing to run smoothly which is damn important in a multiplayer for people less fortunate to have a killer rig. So yes, I love IW and MW3 for using an 'older' engine, but damn, the game is pretty, from the submarine hunting mission to the sandstorm one, I didn't turn my eyes away from the screen a single moment.

I love BF, but BF3 is just not in my alley thanks to the QTE-heavy single player. But then again, CoD does suffer from a similar problem with way too many cutscenes that take control away from the player or turret sections which i despise though the ones in MW3 were definitely fun as hell like controlling the ground drone to unleash a hail on bullets on Makarov's bros.

Don't even get me started with how I hate Zombies and always wanted a survival mode that feels closer to MW than a Zombie game. Hurray for a real Survival mode!

cainx10a:

I love BF, but BF3 is just not in my alley thanks to the QTE-heavy single player.

Wait... so if the singleplayer letting you down is why you dislike BF3 then what BF games did you actually like? Because while BC/BC2 were alright (I stress alright), almost every other BF game didn't have a single player campaign at all.
----------
Anyways, fairly standard review. Conforms with what I expected and all that and at least Justin didn't do the whole thing pretending to be Soap or Price or something :P

One thing though, it took more than a week to get the Battlefield 3 review out but very little time to do this one. Furthermore both were reviewed by Justin Clouse so it's not like there'd be too many methodological reasons for the time gap.

So either
1) MW3 has very little new content to be explored for the review relative to BF3
2) The Escapist put more of its resources (i.e. Justin Clouse man-hours) into getting out the review for the big popular FPS title as opposed to its underdog competitor.
3) I'm reading too much into this.

Edit* Also there's more people whining about the "incoming shit storm" than there have been people flaming. <3 internet.

I've never played Modern Warfare, but that Kill Confirmed game sounds fun. I have to say, if there was so much a push for multiplayer from most of the game's players, there probably would be more effort put into the single-player. Activision is betting that not making the extra effort is worth it.
Sucks to be in the minority.

cainx10a:

maddawg IAJI:
The 5 hour estimated single player time is generous on its own. I beat the game on Veteran in a little over 7 hours on my first go through the game and I honestly was rather upset at how weak the entire game was. I always enjoyed the Call of Duty series single player for its difficult Veteran mode, but the last couple games have become far too easy in my opinion.

Or maybe you got better ;) I know I died a lot on the normal difficulty > . >

No, trust me, I still died plenty, but I've rarely been able to beat one of the CoD games on Veteran as quickly as this. Even Black Ops took me around a week to beat. I remember having to take a few months hiatus from my Cod 3 Veteran run, simply because it got the better of me. I still remember when I finally did beat that game, I felt so fucking happy and accomplished.

Besides, even if I did get better, I still shouldn't be capable of beating the game that quickly on my first play through, on the hardest difficulty. I didn't feel like I did something challenging when it was all done, I just looked at the clock on my xbox and literally said, 'I still got 6 hours until Skyrim comes out'

Ive gotta say the review was well written, but my opinions just dont match up. (To put it out there, im a fan of IW's MW and MW2.)

I honestly believe the Single Player was extremly anti-climatic. A few firefights I liked, but it seemed to be 'Checkpoint... infinite spawn enemies... Checkpoint..." It also seemed like they took every awesome mission from 1 and 2 and tried to reform their new game around it. No creativity really. And the end... oh gosh, im still not happy about the last mission. Horrible ending to a great story. The one good thing I have to say about the story was that it was written well... just alot of fluff in it, and not delivered well.

The multiplayer now... erm... Ill make it short. Horrible spawns, no real tactics, no real sniping, alot of unorganized chaos, always feels cramped, custom classes are chaos, and it inherited the 'get killed around walls' problem from black ops.. Pro's - Pretty good looking maps, love the new game types... erm.. cant think of anymore ATM, but there are some.

So... Yeah... I feel like it was a bad end to the MW series, though it tried to bring some innovation.

Alexnader:

cainx10a:

I love BF, but BF3 is just not in my alley thanks to the QTE-heavy single player.

Wait... so if the singleplayer letting you down is why you dislike BF3 then what BF games did you actually like? Because while BC/BC2 were alright (I stress alright), almost every other BF game didn't have a single player campaign at all.

Let's see, I played all BF games in multiplayer for quite some time except the console ones like Modern Combat and loved them all. But single player is an important component of the entire package for me now since I don't play online that much. That's why I chose MW3 over BF3, because of extended single player components like Spec Ops. And they never released that co-op part of BF:BC2 for PC too, which was a bit of a disappointment for me, onslaught I believe it was called.

maddawg IAJI:

cainx10a:

maddawg IAJI:
The 5 hour estimated single player time is generous on its own. I beat the game on Veteran in a little over 7 hours on my first go through the game and I honestly was rather upset at how weak the entire game was. I always enjoyed the Call of Duty series single player for its difficult Veteran mode, but the last couple games have become far too easy in my opinion.

Or maybe you got better ;) I know I died a lot on the normal difficulty > . >

No, trust me, I still died plenty, but I've rarely been able to beat one of the CoD games on Veteran as quickly as this. Even Black Ops took me around a week to beat. I remember having to take a few months hiatus from my Cod 3 Veteran run, simply because it got the better of me. I still remember when I finally did beat that game, I felt so fucking happy and accomplished.

Besides, even if I did get better, I still shouldn't be capable of beating the game that quickly on my first play through, on the hardest difficulty. I didn't feel like I did something challenging when it was all done, I just looked at the clock on my xbox and literally said, 'I still got 6 hours until Skyrim comes out'

I see. Oh well, enjoy Skyrim and kill a few of the cat people for me. Damn Khajits.

cainx10a:

Alexnader:

cainx10a:

I love BF, but BF3 is just not in my alley thanks to the QTE-heavy single player.

Wait... so if the singleplayer letting you down is why you dislike BF3 then what BF games did you actually like? Because while BC/BC2 were alright (I stress alright), almost every other BF game didn't have a single player campaign at all.

Let's see, I played all BF games in multiplayer for quite some time except the console ones like Modern Combat and loved them all. But single player is an important component of the entire package for me now since I don't play online that much. That's why I chose MW3 over BF3, because of extended single player components like Spec Ops. And they never released that co-op part of BF:BC2 for PC too, which was a bit of a disappointment for me, onslaught I believe it was called.

maddawg IAJI:

cainx10a:

Or maybe you got better ;) I know I died a lot on the normal difficulty > . >

No, trust me, I still died plenty, but I've rarely been able to beat one of the CoD games on Veteran as quickly as this. Even Black Ops took me around a week to beat. I remember having to take a few months hiatus from my Cod 3 Veteran run, simply because it got the better of me. I still remember when I finally did beat that game, I felt so fucking happy and accomplished.

Besides, even if I did get better, I still shouldn't be capable of beating the game that quickly on my first play through, on the hardest difficulty. I didn't feel like I did something challenging when it was all done, I just looked at the clock on my xbox and literally said, 'I still got 6 hours until Skyrim comes out'

I see. Oh well, enjoy Skyrim and kill a few of the cat people for me. Damn Khajits.

I would, but I've only seen one so far and he tried to assassinate me :<

I have to say, after being an snobby jackass with nothing but Minecraft and Dark Souls and indie games for months, it felt great to sit back and enjoy some spectacle for a change. I think it's safe to say that MW3's single player trounces BF3's, for what that's worth, and the survival and spec ops missions add a lot of life to it.

And multiplayer? Well, I think the truth is that BF3 and MW3 are different enough in philosophy that trying to compare the two is just a waste of time.

So yeah, Modern Warfare 3 is a great game.

cainx10a:

I love BF, but BF3 is just not in my alley thanks to the QTE-heavy single player.

See, BF3 was really hilarious. While the MP is excellent, all the SP did was remind me how awesome CoD4:MW1 was.

Sneaky sniper level where you follow your buddy stealthily but end up in a massive firefight anyway? Being executed in front of a camera by some Arab dude? Never seen that before.

OT: The review seemed, as someone already pointed out, rather diplomatic. ;)

In my opinion it was nowhere near as fun as Arkham City or Uncharted 3.
But I still had a blast playing it.
Still no matter what's being said and how good or bad it actually is, people will always bash on it just because they can.

Does it have vehicles in multiplayer?

What is everyone in here going on about? I didn't think this review sounded forced at all. From someone who is neutral on CoD, and is on the fence about buying this one, I think this was a very fair review that did a good job on showing what new features are available.

Well it's not going to be terribly different than the last one and that can be good. If you really liked the last one then you'll be happy with an upgraded version. Personally I enjoyed Battlefield more.

I you like the first 2 you'll probably like this one. I got it for the singleplayer Michael Bayish story. The only reason I still have it is because my friends have it. If you don't have at least 6-9 friends to play with, it probably isn't going to be fun.

Bottom like for me as with most games:

If you like it, be quiet, play it and go on with your life.

If you don't like it, be quiet, don't play it and go on with your life.

Although this is a more toned down version of my methodology its served me well the past 2 decades.

I never owned a CoD game before so i was thinking of changing my policy about them if this looked good.

But it doesn't seem like too much has changed and Miracle of Sound's been mentioning god-awful lag so i doubt i'll give it my time of day.

oh no! a game I hate got a high score!!

aaaaaaaaaaaaand life goes on

Ive only played the mp at a mates house, but while its fun it does seem the same as previous ones and suffers from the same old problems. Xbl seems to be crippled with lag at times and the campers are still out in force.

While its not "ololol itz da terriblez, buyz da skyrimz's now!!!!", it is quite fun and like all the modern warfare series, a nice little time waster.

SonicKoala:
I expected as much - I'm a little put-off by the '4.5 star' ranking, though. That seems a tad generous given the fact that this seems like little more than a rehash of the previous two MW titles.

Jegsimmons:
the images and gameplayed he showed really contrasted from what he said, it honestly looked lackluster and didnt seem like much was new, just sort of re-skinned.

Agreed. Is it just me, or does Call of Duty really feel similar to the Madden games, in that the tweaks to each new iteration aren't anything major and the core of the game is still, essentially, the same thing. I'm really curious as to how much of this game could have just been DLC for Modern Warfare 2.

Only played the multi player and a bit of spec ops so far, but I am thoroughly enjoying it. There does seem to be some little annoying issues with the multi player though, like seemingly being shot around corners, and Assault rifles seeming over powered/ shotguns and SMG's feeling under powered. But as a whole the multi player it quite fun for me, especially Kill Confirmed!

snfonseka:
Does it have vehicles in multiplayer?

Nope, but it has remote drones, very much like Frontlines and Homefront, but better.

my major complaint with this review is that he said he bearly played the other CoD games, but wss then able to draw a bunch of comparisons to them

It appears that the review has accidentally included PC under platforms :P

4.5 stars?


If someone can spend 45 minutes listing mostly flaws, I don't think it deserves 4.5 stars.
I mean, shit, you barely mentioned any flaws besides the single player. No matter what the game is, you should be pointing out more than "half-flaws", as with the single player campaign leaving you wanting more "both in the good and the bad sense".

No zombie mode? Fail!

Anyways, I've played MW2 and didn't get the story. I wonder what 'callbacks' to MW2 are there in MW3.

If you're not fatigued by the series, you should definitely pick up MW3.

Yeah, basically what it's saying is, "this game is fantastic because some people will like it, 4.5/5, let's not take into account its faults"

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here