724 of 848 people found the following review helpful
on November 11, 2011
I bought this game knowing it would be a redux of MW2, I didn't care as I enjoyed that game. COD has always been a game that I could easily pick up and play for a few hours a couple of times a week. The good news is that this game still runs smooth as butter and has the same smooth controls. The bad news is that the new maps are all garbage (well ok not all of them, but you get the point). Its a total --to borrow a phrase from Fantastic Mr. Fox-- "Clustercuss". The maps are decently sized, but they're also cramped and claustrophobic. Way too many small alleys and corridors that eliminate the ability to get a feel for where the opposition is coming from.
Any indoor/enclosed area is a death trap, apparently in the world of COD there are building laws and building codes that require every wall in every structure to have at least one door and one window. Meanwhile the open areas are full of boxes, crates, burning cars, and yes even ANOTHER downed helicopter (really? we already played Crash twice). The turf war aspect of multiplayer is what I enjoyed about COD4 and MW2, that dynamic is sorely missing from this game, basically you run around and hope that when you come across someone you are behind them, and not the other way around.
When I go to the firing range I don't go there to shoot targets four feet away, if I wanted if i wanted to that I'd go play Lasertag with a bunch of 11 year olds, which is think is actually the age demographic this game is trying to appeal to.
If you are going to release what is essentially a re-do of your old game at least create some new and interesting maps. If you've ever played paintball at a speedball/indoor course then you know how every map will play out in this game, except that when you play indoor paintball people don't magically spawn 10 feet behind you.
COD we had some fun together, we knew it wouldn't last forever, and we've both changed. I'd love to tell you that it's not you, it's me, but that would be a lie. It's you. Sorry. Now go make me a sandwich
211 of 270 people found the following review helpful
on November 15, 2011
I have always loved the Call of Duty series but as of late it has been given the same treatment as the Madden series (IE they add TINY features each year and ask you to pay 60$ for a """new""" game). But this latest installment has crossed the line. Most of the fanboys constantly ask well WHY do you not like this game? (Valid question and i shall go through that in multiple points)
1. The maps are the smallest in ANY Call of duty game to the point your nearly always spawning right on top of someone.
2. The graphics engine is the exact same as MW2 regardless of what any fanboy tries to tell you. This may have been ok if this game was released a year after MW2 but not now.
3. Already new Wall glitches in the game and similar problems MW2 was plagued with (Youtube and see it for yourself).
4. P2P servers....again....in 2011? REALLY? Why on earth would you use P2P servers which are Laggy,Slow,Disconnect often,Easily hackable when most other major IP's use Dedicated servers.....Activision will make 3-4X more money then EA will see from BF3 and even they put dedicated servers into BF3.
5. The Campaign is Short/easy and Extremely predictable....a rather large disappointment for a direct sequel.
6. Rampant Killstreaks What i mean by this is since the maps are so insanely small you can rackup killstreaks way way easier then in previous CoD titles. So you see 3-4X more killstreaks then in previous versions.
7. The leaderboards have ALREADY been hacked again....(Look at the leaderboards see for yourself)
8. The hit detection....is the worst i have seen in any shooter since...hell ever?
9. No Marathon perk (Opinion)
10. EVERY gun is insanely overpowered, literally even the SMG's kill in 2-3 Shots at medium distance. Combine that with small maps and it becomes a Camp fest of who runs around corner A first.
All in All this is the biggest disappointment in the series in my mind...Save yourself the 60$ and take a woman out to dinner.
17 of 20 people found the following review helpful
on December 5, 2011
This game currently holds the record for sales in a week and sales in one day for any video game. People like to say this is a bad game that only sells well because of advertisement and hype. If that were true it would not explain why people continue to play it or why they continue to pick this up year after year. Are all these COD fans just miserably playing online not having fun? The series maybe boring and unimpressive to many but it appeals to a demographic and it appeals to it well.
It's simple: if you've liked the previous CoD games then you'll like this one. If you were expecting something ground-breaking and new then this game is not for you. This game is like Madden. All you're going to get is new weapons, maps, some tweaks, and some new features. Whether or not this justifies the price tag is a different story. I'm purely basing my review on entertainment.
As a long-time fan of the series I'll start off with the bad. The singleplayer is as useless as ever with a non-sense story that you simply will not care about. It is repetitive and linear with overwhelming spawning enemy AI shooting from all directions serving as the only challenge. The only variation is some vehicle levels reused from previous Call of Duty entries. There are no tools at your disposable to change things up. It's the same shoot, cover, grenades mechanic in place since the first Call of Duty on PC. At least back then the firefights felt intense and you were part of an actual historical event. While Call of Duty 4's campaign was entertaining the following MW2 and MW3 don't add anything, the surprises and thrills are gone. SPOILER: when Jackson died in COD4 it was dramatic and unexpected. When this same trick is used in MW2 (twice) and MW3 it's just not as interesting.
**My major gripe is that there's no consistency of characters. Characters are constantly being introduced and killed off in every entry. Soap, Price, and Nikolai are about the only consistent thing about this series in terms of story. Even then they are just empty NPCs providing orders and guidance to the player. There's never any interaction or personality shown to make you care.
I'll move on to the reason why most people buy this game or any CoD game for that matter: the multiplayer. As usual thing are played out on medium-sized maps between 6-player teams. The most popular game modes are TDM and Domination. Multiplayer is fast, intense, and catered towards those with short attention spans like myself. You won't have to traverse much ground in order to find something to shoot at. Some prefer more variation, obviously Battlefield 3 being the main example. There's nothing wrong with that game but I prefer the down and dirty street fight. If you do too, you'll feel right at home.
The new "strike packages" are welcome giving players different options in terms of playing style and tactics. For instance, the support strike package does not rely on consecutive kills. It continually stacks and does not reset after dying. This allows players to be more aggressive while still supporting team members. Likewise the specialist strike package allows players to add perks to their original 3. After getting 8 kills they player will have all perks becoming a super soldier. Now they won't be able to call in any killstreaks but the advantage of additional perks is a great advantage in a gun vs. gun situation.
Maps were advertised as being more balanced. This is a matter of opinion but I'll have to agree. For the most part the maps have been designed to weaken camp areas. Most sniping/camp spots will have too many alternate routes to enter and flank. Other spots will just be awkwardly placed not giving the player enough view over heavy traffic areas. There are plenty of camping players but what do you expect in an FPS game.
Perks have been reorganized in a way that forces players to make some hard choices on how they set up their classes. Of course the specialist strike package remedies that but in general I've seen people go with the normal killstreaks. For instance, in previous games the player would use a perk to be invisible to radar. This perk would also double as protection against air support. They have now been separated into two different categories. The same goes for the popular 'sleight of hand' perk that allowed faster reloads as well as faster aiming. Now as two separate perks players will need to rely more on careful playing and good old reflexes.
Not such a big deal since it's identical to MW2 but the weapons are great. In Black Ops each category (assault, light machine gun, sub machine guns) had only a couple of weapons worth using. These weapons were so good there was no point in using anything else. MW3 has the reverse effect where everything works great, almost too great, where gun selection sometimes feels like it doesn't make a difference. It comes down to preference.
The downsides of multiplayer is the lack of dedicated servers which I've complained about since CoD switched over from PC. This causes you to rely on the host system. I'm not sure why but every now and then I'll be 'slower' than everyone else usually getting shot after getting behind cover or just a second before I actually spot an enemy. Sometimes I can tell this is working in my favor and I'll have an amazing time but I'd much rather everyone just be on the same level in terms of online latency.
This system prevents users from joining games. It'll just randomly throw you into any game that has a slot for you or your party. This results in throwing players into a lot of losing games. Why? With a lot of people getting frustrated and leaving a losing round it creates gaps on the losing team. Innocent players looking to join a game are suddenly thrown into a round with a 30 score gap that's about to end. The game counts this as a loss! You literally can join a game, do nothing, and still lose.
Another issue is the auto-balancing system. I don't play in a party so when I do well the next round assures that I get stuck with all of the less skilled players to make sure I lose so things stay 'fair.' I'm not using anything that puts me at an advantage over anyone else so I'm bothered that the game feels I need to be punished for playing well. To put things in perspective I have a 2.00 KDR for TDM but only a 1.20 win record. In theory that is about right since the autobalancing is doing it's job. 50 percent of the time you should be put on a good team and the other 50 the losing team. So maybe this is a good thing for some?
I've ranted on long enough but I will repeat what I said before. People do not like this game and never will. The people that do (there are obviously many) wilkl play it and enjoy it as always. The graphics are aging, the game is very similar to MW2, and if you had problems with the series before most of those problems are still there.
The game is FUN. That's all there is to it. If it's not for you that's fine. To be fair I think this is the last COD game for me. It's a solid final entry to the series but if they make another one and it's still the same I'm probably satisfied with this one.
I look at the progression of this series like this:
COD4 - Introduced classes, perks, modern setting, and more arcade-like gameplay
MW2 - Introduced "super power" type perks, pushed the game over the top in terms of arcade style, introduced killstreaks which would become a staple of the series, finalized the game to a console audience in terms of style, maps, and controls/weapons
Black Ops - balanced the game, took a step back in terms of style, map design, weapons, and was actually a little too watered down from what MW2 was.
MW3 - Balances between COD4 and MW2 very well, really no where for the series to go from here
27 of 34 people found the following review helpful
on November 17, 2011
I played through the campaign in a day and it was just so-so. I was very disappointed that they did away with the multiplayer combat training, which (in COD: Black Ops) a good place to warm up and a nice refuge when it became tiresome being paired with foul-mouthed adolescents. I can't recomend this game.
279 of 375 people found the following review helpful
on November 8, 2011
If you love Call of Duty, then this is your game. If you have already bought Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, you shouldn't even be reading this. I have always been on the fence. After CoD 2, the single player of every game that followed, even CoD 4, was just a light gun game. You are continually led on rails to every checkpoint by bullet hose spraying enemies. There is no actual squad or enemy AI to speak of, they all just fire blindly and never reload. I know there are a few people who still play these games for the story mode, but I don't. I'm not going to go on too long because these things come out every year so there's not much new to explain.
Spec Ops is greatly improved and includes ranking and perks this time around which, as far as these modes go, is a HUGE improvement on the zombies and horde stuff from WaW and Black Ops. I like it so far, but as with all of these side mission/survival deals, I usually get tired of them after a week. Good improvement, but not a game changer.
Well on the good side for multiplayer, there are a lot of maps. On the bad side, the guns have had a serious working over. More than ever before the weapons shoot like frickin lasers. Nothing sways and you die much much faster than even in MW2. I'm pretty amazed they bothered to include a weapon power up to kill the weapon sway. What sway?!? Overall, the game really feels a lot more like the way Black Ops played than that intangible "Feel" of the Modern Warfare games. Black Ops was the best selling game of all time, or something like that, so I doubt many will complain, but I feel a difference. The theater mode does return, but there are no wager matches, which is kinda weak, but Kill Confirmed is good. The kill streaks have been warmed over with strike package streaks that differ on classes. This is welcome as some classes you can continue to rack up your points in objective based achievements instead of just kills, but lets be honest, people play this game for klilstreaks and I haven't seen any differences yet in how people approach their play styles here. It's kill or be killed as it has always been.
Oh well, I'm just looking over this thing after a few hours, and its just the same fun you always look for in CoD, but I'm sensing there isn't much left in this tube of tooth paste from here on out. They are still relying on the stupid P2P host networking which means lag and ended games still crop up. You still can hide in a tin building during an airstrike and live to tell the tale. You still have massively overpowered guns that all feel the same. And yes, you still can have fun with all these things deep into a Saturday night. I'm just wondering what they are going to do next. Unless they come up with something new, I don't see myself buying another one of these next year. Heck, I still play MW2 a few times a week. You aren't missing a whole lot if you pass on this, but if you're a fan, you'll enjoy it.
To be fair, I fired up the single player and I just made a few notes Infinity Ward missed. -- You can play through most of what I have without firing a bullet. You just run to the checkpoints and duck. Sooner or later the enemy there will get shot and you move on. -- Sandman is the worst Delta Force short gunner in history, he can't hit the broadside of a barn. -- Also, Sandman is wearing reflective eye protection - big no no in the Army. Eye protection should be clear or non reflective ***READ Reply from T.A. Frank in the comments on the eyewear. Best info you'll find *** A real veteran could clear this up if I am wrong. -- The Multiplayer is fun, but the "Lost host connection" hasn't gone anywhere. I'm enjoying , but just like any other heavily marketed product, just play it for what it is, don't expect this game to do your laundry for you.
After going between MW2 and MW3, I can say a lot of the quick death and lag issues come down to the fact that MW3 is simply set to play much faster. Back to back, you can just tell by running and toggling iron sights - in addition to the new avatar stances, the animations really are quicker. I think Black Ops was also faster than MW2. Unless you happen to be host, some games you are going to have a bad day. I'm on 10 meg and watching kill cams and the Vault videos, about half the time, the delay I see from my character is not what I actually experienced. Other times I get what seems like an endless supply of hit markers and no kill. I've even killed people I'm not aiming at. I'm not really sure if it is connection related or the networking part of the game is simply unable to keep the sync up accurately.
IW's Rober Bowling via twitter: "Yes, both platforms will be receiving updates to address lag concerns"
96 of 128 people found the following review helpful
on February 4, 2012
Activision would prefer to build games that do not require servers, since servers cost money. The alternative is to have one of the players in each game act as a server (host). In several other games the host gains an advantage because other players experience a short delay in receiving data from the host. To try and combat the host advantage, MW3 and Black Ops use lag compensation. Lag compensation attempts to put everyone on a level playing field by predicting player actions and have the host put the puzzle back together later. Unfortunately, this method has created a very frustrating environment for gamers. On your side you may take several shots when going 1-on-1 with another player, but with lag compensation you may lose without the game showing you took a single shot (I recommend you youtube 'MW3 lag compensation').
Lag compensation ruined that last call of duty game (Black Ops) and it continues to do so in Modern Warefare 3. If multiplayer is the main reason you are picking this game up, then please read reviews from other online gamers before purchasing. Call of Duty has been a series with record sales for each release, so there isn't much incentive for Activision to fix this major issue with game play. As a consumer, I regret contributing to this games sales records and I will not be making that mistake again in future releases.
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful
on February 21, 2012
I got this game Christmas day (yes late, I know.) I've always like Call of Duty games, but MW3 just blew my mind. Campaign was alright, but I don't play games for the campaign.
To the multiplayer. Worst game I've ever played. Over-powered weapons, annoying 12 year olds who don't realize that they're yelling in your ears with a headset on, shooting through walls WTF? I was just playing this game, and I was in full cover behind a concrete wall, and a sniper killed me. I even watched the killcam, and it showed me completely in cover.
Twenty hits with any gun to hurt someone, and three hits with any gun for me to get killed, is absolutely ridiculous. I don't understand how this game sold so many copies.
11 of 13 people found the following review helpful
A few years ago I would have been extremely excited when all the hype surrounding Modern Warfare 3 started to surface, but after 2 lack luster COD titles from both IW and Treyarch, I knew better than to expect that this game would be much of an improvement (if any) from MW2. When the game was released I didn't even lift a finger to go out and get it and the only reason I finally tried it out was that it happened to be in my local Red Box machine.
If you played MW2, then you basically already know what to expect here. While the environments are different everything else is pretty much the same, save for a few new weapons. Enemies seems to spawn endlessly and always concentrate there fire on you out of all the people in your squad. There is still non-stop action, endless explosions, and too many "OOOOH LOOK AT THAT!!" moments. Admittedly, it wasn't as bad as MW2 which was just a complete mess, but still anything would be an improvement over MW2 single player campaign. Where the game differs from MW2 is that is is EXTREMELY short. As I said earlier, I got this game from Red Box, for a couple of bucks, and the next day, about 5 hours before I had to return it, I had already beat the game on Hardened. My official completion time was 7 hours, 11 minutes. So if you plan to play only the single player, do not waste your money, it is not worth it at all.
Multiplayer is where many people will be spending their time with after playing the single player, so after beating the game, I decided to try my hand at this. Basically all the problems in MW2 (and Black Ops) are also in MW3's multiplayer. IW completely ignored all the issues and complaints from many gamers such as myself had with these two titles.
Spawning: People still spawn right behind you, seemingly immediately after you move out of a spot. I remember being spawn into a game for the very first time and I'm already getting shot in the head before I can even move. I wish this was an isolated incident, but unfortunately it is not. I don't know why IW and Treyarch can't ever seem to get spawning right. What I find funny is during an interview with IW, they came right out and said that spawning was fixed. WRONG!
Hit detection: Hit detection is still horrible. Playing Core is already ridiculous enough as it is being though it takes 35 shots to bring someone down, but this coupled with poor hit detection makes this situation even worse. I guess this would be better when playing Hard core, but you can't even play hard core until you reach a certain level, so you are forced to deal with this issue until you reach a certain level.
Magic Bullets: Just like MW2, bullets still seem to curve around corners, so don't think you are safe from enemy fire, because quite often the bullet will still find you.
There are some nice new game modes like Kill confirmed which doesn't award you a kill unless you pick up the person's dog tags, but the base game play is so bad, even this game mode is not enjoyable as it could have been.
Maybe IW will "patch" it again, but I don't understand why can't they get it right the first time for once. I'm glad I finally got to play the game, and I'm glad I beat the game for only 2 dollars instead of dropping fifty or sixty bucks on a 7 hour single player game, and the same flawed multiplayer that the COD series is unfortunately becoming known for. All of my XBOX Live friends who I played Black Ops with frequently have moved on to MW3, but I decided to not give COD anymore of my money until they make a concerted effort to fix what is wrong with their games. You know I wouldn't even mind the lack luster single player so much if their multiplayer was on point, but it is not. Me, I'm still playing Black Ops, and honestly once I reach the 20,000 kill mark, I will stop playing that game as well.
The COD series is becoming the Madden of First Person shooters, minus the exclusive license. They release the same game every year with a hand full of new features, but refuse to fix what has been broken for years. They instead use their resources make flashy commercials hoping to reel in the next batch of sheep that will blindly buy their games every year for years to come.
If you only want to play this game for the single player, do not waste your money on a purchase, this game can be easily beaten in a few hours. In addition, if you are expecting an improved multiplayer experience from past COD titles, then you definitely will not get it here. At the minimum, I would say the single player is worth playing, but other than that I wouldn't even bother.
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful
on March 19, 2012
Several problems have already been well documented by other reviews. I'll add the following two:
1. Multiplayer will often join you into a game that is seconds away from ending. This is a very basic programming bug that they refuse to look into.
2. Greed: It's been covered before but the elite membership alienated features and availability from those of us who don't care to pay them more than the standard price of a video game.
I'm done with the series, and I hope those reading this will be discouraged enough to pull their support for MW3 and future titles.
9 of 10 people found the following review helpful
on December 11, 2011
The Campaign was pretty fun.. But no one cares about the Single Player when talking about CoD.. So lets get straight to the Multiplayer
The Multiplayer has potential to be so good, but failed. The maps are very claustrophobic. Theres obstacles everywhere, hallways are narrow, and full of so many props you'll find yourself getting stuck on this things more often than not. Another thing is Assassin Pro. When we first heard about Assassin, most people knew that everyone would use it. Everyone is an understatement. Slows the game down like crazy, and just makes it boring. Quick-Scoping is back, and if your competitive and hate quickscopers, don't even bother.. Everyone who uses a sniper, you can almost guarantee will quick-scope, and that hurts your team.. Nobody wants teammates that go 6-34, and not go for the objectives.
So to summarize:
- Bad Maps
- Assassin Pro is overused
- Quickscoping is back
I suggest you rent it first. Game is fun for about 2 rounds then it gets old...