Industrial Deals HPC Magazine Deals Holiday Dress Guide nav_sap_hiltonhonors_launch For a limited time. 3 months for $0.99. Amazon Music Unlimited. New subscribers only. Terms and conditions apply. Electronics Gift Guide Limited time offer Try it first with samples Handmade Gift Shop Holiday Home Gift Guide Book a house cleaner for 2 or more hours on Amazon TNF TNF TNF  Echo Devices starting at $29.99 Save $30 on All-New Fire HD 8. Limited-time offer. $20 off Kindle Paperwhite GNO Shop Now HTL17_gno

Customer Review

on September 2, 2012
As with my other videogame review, let's get the game from every side, and formulate an opinion.
Campaign:
The campaign is seriously fun. It dosen't hold up with the MW1 campaign as much, do to the removal of cheats but there is still plenty to keep you interested. Each mission takes you to a variety of locations and the story holds up pretty well, although it was pretty hard to follow. The entire game is satisfying and you feel like every mission played was time well spent. Half the missions have you as Roach, under command of John Mactavish as a part of task force 141: a handpicked group of soldiers from around the globe. The other half has you playing as Private Ramirez, an army ranger defending America from a Russian invasion (Yes, it's a requirement that Russians are the enemy in COD games) The veteran mode isn't too easy, but not too hard either. A few missions will breeze on by, while some may have you throwing your controller at the wall, namely loose ends and takedown. I felt quite satisfied with the ending, although I don't get why people dislike the cliffhanger. Overall, I guarantee you will like the campaign if you decide to play it. Unless you're an anti-cod fanboy.

Spec-ops:
It sucks. The missions are more of the same from the campaign, except with a teammate. Dosen't even have online matchmaking. The missions are 50% survival with a different mask, (Get this many points to beat the mission in this small area, BTW you get only get points for killing people) and the other half is getting from point A to point B. The missions offer very little in terms of fun, and the most they did in creativity was have 2 levels of juggernaughts only. This is the only part of the game that I think MW3 did better at.

Multiplayer:
The thing about the multiplayer is that it's terribly unbalanced, but there's not a whole lot of people abusing it anymore. 90% of the people playing will do so fairly, but then there's that small amount running around with commando, final stand, noob tubes, danger close, and what-have-you. The multiplayer is decent if you're playing with the right people. The maps look good too, and there's a nice balance of close quarters maps as well as very sniper friendly maps with plenty of grass or snow to hide in. As a side note, I don't get why everyone complained about the nuke. If I'm getting my a*s beat with 1 kill and 17 deaths, I think I would gladly accept a mercy killing. Now in MW3, The nuke (or MOAB, as it's called now) Is almost entirely useless. It kills the entire team once, and thats if they're not respawning, and gives them a temporary EMP. Big woop. You could get more kills with the AC-130.

Overall:
The graphics largely improved over MW1, and the guns look way better as well (even better then in MW3, sadly). The biggest problem with this game, is not the games fault at all. Many people insist on complaining about it and love to hate it, and I can assure that alot of those people have never played a COD game in their life. People say that COD always recycles the same thing over and over again. By that account, every game is recycling what the previous one had. (The following are all relative to the previous title in the series) Halo reach only added assassinations, armor abilities and graphics. Battlefield just has new weapons and going to prone.
Gears of war has some new weapons and more executions. Half-life 2 has new weapons and better graphics. Skyrim has new weapons and better graphics. Halo 3 has better graphics. Left 4 dead has new weapons. So does assassins creed. Every game basically recycles the same thing over and over. In particular is assassins creed. The only major difference between AC2 and AC brotherhood Is Assassin buddies. Everything else is the same but with a different face (IE, brutus armor is just an ugly version of altairs armor) But no one complains about them recycling the same game. Call of duty MW2 compared to COD4 added properks, more attachments and definately better graphics. Singling out COD just makes you look like an a*s. Every game recycles the same crap over and over. People also complain that only no-life 12 year olds who love swearing into the mic play COD. I have two things to say to those people.
1. I rarely see high pitched kids in any COD game. When I do, It's pretty much always in COD: BO zombies, and they usually don't go around trolling people; They just want to play the game and help get to those higher waves.
2. There's a handy dandy mute button.
That's all. I'm done here. If you can get over your Absurd and asinine hate for COD, then give it a try. Otherwise, go play your marvelous games that change in every possible way every time a new one is released. Oh wait...
0Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse| Permalink
What's this?

What are product links?

In the text of your review, you can link directly to any product offered on Amazon.com. To insert a product link, follow these steps:
1. Find the product you want to reference on Amazon.com
2. Copy the web address of the product
3. Click Insert product link
4. Paste the web address in the box
5. Click Select
6. Selecting the item displayed will insert text that looks like this: [[ASIN:014312854XHamlet (The Pelican Shakespeare)]]
7. When your review is displayed on Amazon.com, this text will be transformed into a hyperlink, like so:Hamlet (The Pelican Shakespeare)

You are limited to 10 product links in your review, and your link text may not be longer than 256 characters.