20 of 21 people found the following review helpful
on December 23, 2006
I caved and bought this for the 360 since it seems that the developers aren't willing to make a PC version.
I'm finding the game to be buggy...
I'm only on the 3rd mission and the game has locked up on me about two times per mission so far. Restarting the game is painful since you're forced to watch, in entirety, the long cutscene that precedes each mission before you can jump back to whatever checkpoint you last made it to. (My understanding is that cutscenes are covering up loading of the level in the background, but even after the level loads, it would be nice if they then let you then skip.)
I also keep getting stuck on terrain. Keep away from hay bails next to barns. And don't try and walk between a blown up tank and a hedge hog. Dropping a grenade at your feet often helps dislodge you; if not, you need to restart.
I'm unhappy with the gameplay as compared to COD2.
As soon as they spot you, it seems enemies focus most of their firing on you seem and mostly ignore your squad mates. It's as if the Germans have put a contract out on your head or something. This differs from COD2 which made a successful attempt at making you feel like a small part of a huge epic battle, with the enemy shooting at everybody, not just you.
Graphics are pretty good, except that metal surfaces are too shiny. All the soldiers, both friendly and especially enemy, look like their wearing white helmets because of the huge reflections on them. Germans are easy to spot and target because of that, though.
You can't just sit back and pick off the enemies as they'll usually continually respawn. You need to advance. The only way for your squad mates to move forward and help you out is for you to advance forward enough to cross some invisible line. Doing so causes the enemy to stop spawning in that area, and triggers your squad mates to move forward. In fact, in many parts of the levels, you don't really need to shoot at anything. Just can run forward and use cover until you trigger the enemy spawning to stop and then your squad will move in a take out whatever Germans are still around.
Also, don't try and vear off the rails this game has you on. In COD2, you could often separate from your squad and help them out by flanking on your own the enemy position they were approaching. COD3 will punish you for that, though. If you vear off, fixed MG emplacements focus on you and will usually shoot you right down. So if the game tells you to 'stay behind the tank for cover', then stay behind it for cover. Trying an do something just a bit different, and the game will slap you for it. Even if the game doesn't take you out, vearing off will usually cause you to miss crossing the invisible lines. i.e., there might be two acres of pasture for you move around, but if you try and move up through, say, the 20% to the far right or the 20% to the far left, then you'll miss the triggers that cause the enemy to stop spawning, even if you make it all the way foward where you need to go.
62 of 75 people found the following review helpful
on November 11, 2006
I am a huge fan of world war 2 first person shooters. I've been with the genre since the begining of medal of honor. since then, not too much has been more impresive to me than call of duty. It was a wonderfual game and still is. Call of Duty 2 was even better. Does this new game maintain the stellar streak the series is on? in a word, yes. Although, it is alot more of the same. But then again, why mess with a great formula? Call of Duty 3 works because it is exactly what the original game was built around, sheer intensity....and also alot of fun. But then you might say, well i've played COD2, are you saying its the same? Yes and No. The basic mechanics are the same and the few newly added gameplay elements do little to nothing for the overall game so in escense. Yea, its the same game. But this time around the levels are bigger and look o so much prettier. Honestly, these are some of the most amazing visuals on the xbox 360. I dare say it puts my beloved COD2 to near shame. The lighting and texturing is beautiful and the explosions are heart stopping to behold. The life like graphics are complimented by a brilliant musical score. Oh, and if anyone should wonder about the ingame soundeffects, just pop in a previous call of duty game and imagine it amped up even more. Seriously, the battlechatter has never been so nicely integrated. COD3 is yet another amazing world war 2 game that will certainly keep veterans of the genre happy and content, meaning on the edge of your seat. The newly implimented rag doll physics and destructable enviroments will make sure you stay there too. I reccomend this game to anyone and everyone who has played a world war two first person shooter and enjoyed it because what we have here ladies and gentelmen is the latest and greatest, the best that money can buy.
9 of 10 people found the following review helpful
on February 18, 2007
Would have been a lot more fun without the [...] bugs such as not being able to move over random bits of terrain, stupid allies who get in the way at the most innappropriate time, or leave you to take on the whole Wehrmacht yourself. CoD2 didn't have these problems, and this is supposed to be better? I've heard that a different team was involved in the production of this version, and it shows. I've completed this on veteran, but don't have the same sense of acheivement I had when I'd finished CoD2 - where defeating the enemy was more important than defeating the bugs. Hope CoD4 is better.
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
It was a mistake for Activision to take the Call of Duty line away from its creators for the third installment. All the big hallmarks of the Call of Duty franchise seem to be here, linear story and cut scenes. But it doesn't seem to have the care and the excitement of the first two CoDs. And the third installment adds nothing to the game. For all intents it is just a poorly done expansion of the second game with no real improvements of polishing. It also seems that half of the game your character is being controlled by the computer or in a state of advanced shell shock. This seems to be a very heavy handed way of insuring the player appreciates all the scripted events throughout the game.
As just another FPS WW2 shooter it might be an alright game. But since it carries the Call of Duty name people should, and do, expect it to be better than average. It is unfortunate that CoD3 isn't. I would recommend this game as a weekend rental maybe but this title left me very disappointed. It is good to see Call of Duty 4 returned to Infinity Ward.
7 of 8 people found the following review helpful
on November 23, 2006
As many of the past reviews has stated, the single player campaign is somewhat of a mixed bag compared to it's predecessor, Call of Duty 2. However, if you are mainly interested in this game for it's multiplayer features, you will find Call of Duty 3 a very worthy purchase.
I've played through the single player campaign and spent quite a few hours playing the multiplayer. I did have more fun with COD2's single player, but COD3 single player was still a blast. You still get that non stop action, with tons of soldiers around you that give you the feeling you are just another soldier among many, and not Rambo whos going to kill everyone yourself, but still makes you feel that you are making a big difference in the struggle.
I did wish there were a couple more scenarios where you operate the tanks. There are quite a few scenarios where you drive a jeep. They are pretty ho hum. Feels like the jeep is on rails. I think COD2 had a better balance and quality of vehicle missions.
Now for many FPS shooter fans, the single player is just an introduction to the main attraction, the multiplayer. And this is worth the price of admission. I've been playing online shooters for over a decade now, and COD3 online has been one of the most fun. With 24 people in a game, it really does feel like a war, not just 2 squads going against each other.
The classes seem pretty balanced and each offer their own unique gameplay. It's rewarding to revive fallen players and have them thank you. It feels good to pop a cap in a players head from many yards away as he's rushing for your flag. It feels nice to blow up a tank with the bazooka, as well as seeing another player get blown up by a mine you placed around your base. Lot's of variety will bring longevity to the game.
Even with many players, I have rarely experienced lag or disconnections. The maps are well designed and are just the right size, and so far the online community seems great. Definately far less immature gamers than you'll find in Halo 2.
Bottom line is, if you're mainly interested in the multiplayer, you can't go wrong with this game.
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful
on November 13, 2006
First of all, I am a big World War II fan. I love playing all the World War II games that are made for the PC. I decided last week I had to get a Xbox 360 just to play Call of Duty 3 and Gears of War. So I went to a local Gamestop and bought the Xbox 360 along with Call of Duty 3. Gamestop didn't have Gears of War in yet. I ended up getting Gears of War at Circuit City.
Okay so I went home and I set up the Xbox 360 on my tv set and I put in Call of Duty 3 to play and I noticed the picture wasn't that good. So I disconnected the Xbox 360 and I hooked it up to my PC flat screen monitor. Boy, let me tell you something. There was a huge difference in the quality of the picture. I couldn't believe it. And the sound was 100 times better. What is so cool is I can turn on my PC and my Xbox 360 at the same time and switch back and forth playing games from my PC and games from my Xbox 360 on the same PC flat screen monitor. This is the best investment I ever made.
Now my review just has to do with Single Player only. Call of Duty 3 looks even better than Call of Duty 2 on the PC flat screen monitor. Call of Duty 3 is a great game that should have been made for the PC too. The battles are very intense and very realistic. The AI is very good. Both Allies and German troops advance and retreat when they need to. They both use cover very well. It is so cool to fight in huge battles and have large number of troops from both sides fighting against each other. It is especially cool when you have artillery shells exploding all around you while you are right in the middle of fighting a large battle. The graphics are very good. Call of Duty 3 has some the best looking grass and best looking water I've ever seen in a game. I really like the storyline in the game. This game is based on actual battles fought in France during the summer of 1944. I can't wait for Call of Duty 4 to come out next year. I hope it is based on some more World War II campaigns.
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
on January 5, 2007
I sold COD 2 and purchased this and wish I hadn't. This game seems more hurried together and lacks the cohesiveness in the story that COD 2 had. There are also more points where you seem to get stuck, i.e., the computer won't let you around a house so you have to reboot and then the next time it does.
Not a horrible game but if you're going to spend the money COD 2 is far better...and cheaper.
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
on December 13, 2006
It just seems like there are too many "cut scenes" that you have to sit through before you get to the game play. Then the game play itself gets done quickly and before you know it, the game is finished. I do like the fact that you can choose different strategies to go with. But I really liked Call of Duty 2 much better.
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
on October 20, 2007
I'll sum it up this way. At $30, it is not a bad addition to your library. I am really glad I didn't pay full price. I purchased both COD 2 & 3 and played them back-to-back.
On the positive side, it does all of the next-gen stuff very well. It looks great on the HDTV. The sounds are great as you spin around and the conversation moves from speaker to speaker to give you a truly 3-D feel. There are some really fun sequences in the game and specifically I like the tank battles.
Unfortunately, there were just too many glitches to allow me to rate the game higher than about 2.5 to 3 stars. Other reviewers have posted in detail some of these problems, so there is no sense in repeating them here. The biggest one for me is that your team is constantly getting in your way and you can't get around them. I didn't notice that as much in COD2 as I am in COD3.
The game play also feels TOO linear to me. I understand that the nature of an FPS is to be linear, but when this is combined with a complete lack of need for strategy, the game becomes a bit tedious at times. Lets face it, you throw a smoke grenade...hide behind something...pop up and shoot until your health gets low...hide again until your health gets better...repeat. Doesn't really matter whether you want to use the SMG or rifle. My guess is that game is A LOT more fun in multi-player mode, which I haven't tried yet.
I don't think this is a bad game. I just won't be buying COD4 when it comes out. When the price drops to $25 to $30, I will check out the reviews and if it seems that they have fixed some of the glitches, I will definitely give it a spin at that price. I would have to say that I prefer Ghost Recon and Splinter Cell to COD right now.
11 of 15 people found the following review helpful
on November 11, 2006
So after playing this game for a good while, I can genuinely say it's darn near completely unenjoyable. I've not played the multiplayer yet, so this is only for single player. First off, this game would be considered linear even on the N64. All too often, I find myself travelling through hallways with German soldiers in buildings lining them, and find none of these buildings accesible. I'll see an object to take cover behind, a wall, an area inside a building, and I'll head towards it and find myself blocked by an invisible wall, which obviously is a path to a quick death. This actually happens a lot, which is rather unfortunate. Those stupid command options still pop up directly in your view during fights: "switch *** for *** weapon," "Press X to ***." These are extremely annoying, and something I would've hoped they would change from the last game, at least move them down an inch or two on the screen. Cut-scenes cannot be skipped, which actually is exceptionally annoying when you load an old game, because it shows the cut-scene from the last level, then for the new level.
All too often you'll find yourself looking over a rather expansive landscape, but instead of having you fight across it, the designers have you sit in a window and shoot German soldiers for x number of minutes until the air or armor support arrives. The makers also seem to have tried to hide the linear nature of the game by making it more dense and deep looking, but this definitely only hinders the gameplay. It's to such an extent that at points it's completely unclear as to where you're supposed to be headed in a level, simply because so many ways SEEM viable, but rather are protected by the aforementioned invisible wall.
As these game designers stumble into next-gen gaming, I figured they would at least begin to build games of less a generic, Doom-ish style. But rather, they've levelled the graphics up several notches and then let the gameplay slip away. Personally, I don't care that leaks spring from wine barrels and grass is individually rendered now, because the game fails in being enjoyable in almost every way.
As far as I can tell, this is the most beautifully rendered wave attack game I've played. Just that.