Around AOTF ×



Gamers Blast Modern Warfare 3 on Metacritic

by Ethan Powers on November 8, 2011

November 8th 2011 – a release day that most FPS gamers have been waiting well over a year for, has certainly not turned out the way that fans, critics, or in particular, Activison, had initially expected.

I find it hard to imagine that the makers of “The Most Anticipated Game in History” anticipated their AAA product getting completely bashed on Metacritic, the review site that assigns products a weighted average score. While Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 maintains a score of 90 based on 44 critic reviews, hundreds of users that participated in the game’s midnight launch flocked to the “user review” section to voice their opinions. Players are mainly citing the unchanged graphics powered by an increasingly re-hashed engine, a short campaign which offers fans little that they haven’t seen in previous CoD cinematics, and a multiplayer portion that attempts to re-create the magic of the original Modern Warfare yet ultimately ends up feeling like an exact duplication. Some reviewers sarcastically remarked that “Modern Warfare 2.5 is the game’s best map pack to date” yet they are puzzled as to why it was so expensive.

Many fans also seem upset by the positive critical reception Modern Warfare 3 has released to. If MW3‘s legacy truly becomes defined as a game that severely disappointed even the core fanbase that has supported it for so long, it will be difficult for certain reviewers to justify giving the game a perfect score. It may raise further questions regarding the state of video game media and how the intangible factors of game reviews (loyalty to certain developers/publishers, pressure to give AAA games good reviews) tangibly affect the overall score.

Here is a sample of what gamers across all three platforms are saying following the release of Modern Warfare 3:

Xbox 360  (average user score of 2.7 with 123 positive reviews, 17 mixed, 271 negative)

MATT1ST: “Have been playing MW3 online for a few hours now and it surprised me that a game I wasn’t looking forward to, at all, still was able to… disappoint me. Have seen many of the maps and I haven’t felt a presence of a classic map. Running makes you wiggle like a drunk duck, reloading is much quicker than switching weapons. The thing cod “had going for it” was fast fluent game play. Well dedicated servers are even laggier than the P2P ones and when you are prone and aiming down the sight at the same time, you can’t move sideways at all. Ah well, the game was meant for people that don’t aim anyways. Noobtube is the first default class available when you start the online game up for the first time. Keep hyping his game, it still doesn’t change the fact that this is MW2.5 you paid for with your earned money.”

WhitefireWF: “It’s very sad, that people give a developer credit for lazy work. Half of the sounds, equipment, perks, guns, and only one new attachment are in the game. 80% of the killstreaks are the same. And you always the get the feeling “I have done this before”. Survival is sorry attempted at zombies and fails flat. The same COD formula is use, level up, get guns, unlock the same attachments from every call of duty, and rinse repeat. Sad really, this game will not move the industry forward but millions will buy a half tried effort. If any other game did this it would get bashed to crap. Save your money.”

 Paradoxed: “Why bother making a new great game when you can just take your last one and “polish” it a litte? This is IW’s mindset behind MW3. Never have I seen such a lazy excuse for a “new” iteration in a game series. The campaign is mindless and cliche as expected, but MW3 goes out of its way to show you how uterly unoriginal it is. The visuals are practically identical to MW2, and so is most everything else. EVERY single add on to the multiplayer is directly taken from other games. This is laziness at its grandest. If you really liked MW2, then play MW2. This is a 60 dollar polish of it.”

PS3 (average user score of 2.1 with 42 positive reviews, 3 mixed, 89 negative)

Kenjirus: “Played this, this morning and its just a desaturated mess of a game, the whole thing needs to be updated to make it good, the textures are low, the shadows are to dark, the lighting is terrible, the only colour seems to be shades of gray and the sounds are just annoying. Bad show IW, Sledgehammer and Activition, bad show.”

Faelun: “This is honestly just MW2.1 this is awful. I can’t believe I stayed up and went to a midnight launch for this. Complete waste of money, i’m taking this back to the store after work today to trade it in (or return it if they let me) and get battlefield 3. God IW is so lazy this is more or less THE EXACT SAME GAME as MW2 with a couple minor tweaks. Waste of damn money.”

Boofcpw: “I have been an avid supporter of the call of duty franchise for many years, playing each game for hundreds of hours. The latest release, Modern Warfare 3 is however extremely disappointing. There is almost no difference when compared to COD 4, which is disgusting considering that this is a stand alone game, and not just an expansion or map pack. The elite service is also rubbish, charging for things most games offer for free.

PC (average user score of 1.4 with 6 positive reviews, 4 mixed, 38 negative)

Jocksson: “I thought COD4 was a great game and MW2 was ok, however this one fails miserably. I was told in an article the game is not “copied and pasted”. Indeed its not, its trying to be COD4 with new multiplayer modes, yet it fails to even get close to the greatness of COD4. The maps are horrible, COD: Elite is a total waste of money, it feels rushed, there’s a greyish tint on everything in the game, textures etc. And for the singleplayer, linear, boring, and incredibly stupid. I liked the story, but the way it concluded in the end was horrible. Stay away from this PoS. The creators have really outdone themselves in screwing people this time. Perhaps they should try to create a new franchise instead of ripping people off. Thank you IW, sledgehammer and activision for letting me down yet again.”

Omikurita: “WOW. i’ll start by saying i’ve been a big CoD fan since the beginning. First game to ever pull me away from CS:S.. It’s a damn shame what CoD has come to.. I do not see the difference between MW3 and MW2, if anything a bit worse with the new movement and repeated perks. If you already have MW2 no need to get this game. This should have been a DLC at best.. 14.99 game.. HIGHLY DISAPPOINTED…”

Fr0s7y: “I was willing to give IW the benefit of the doubt in their claims that the game was vastly improved, and the new features breathed new life into the game.. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the case. I can’t help but feel like the game I’m playing would be better labeled an expansion pack for MW2, or just MW2.5 at best. IW seems to content now to rehash the same thing year after year without really aiming to do anything new. Such a shame to see this happen to a once great series.”

I recently questioned whether or not the new game modes, which were undoubtedly influenced by other popular FPS titles, would be able to keep CoD loyalists content. In no way did I expect the outpouring of negative responses by some gamers that have supported the Call of Duty franchise since the very beginning.

One has to ask though. The sales numbers for Modern Warfare 3  speak for themselves. Infinity Ward and Activision, regardless of what the majority says about the quality of the game, are cashing in on this entertainment behemoth yet again. Are they required in any way to change a product that produces this much cash flow? I think a good portion of the blame for what fans are describing as a subsidiary of a game that was released 4 years ago, back in November 2007, has to be placed with the people who purchase it. Activision and Infinity Ward are in the business of making money off of video games that appeal to the widest demographic, and in that regard, they are clearly the best.

For those of our readers that have played Modern Warfare 3, what do you think? Is the franchise’s latest installment really that close in design to it’s predecessors? Let us know of your opinion in the comments section below.

Say Something
  • nick

    still havent tried it. Renting it tommorow, but my expectations are rock bottom.

    • Cool dude

      Lol… gamer bombing

    • Fried Ice Cream

      There are over 600,000 people playing online right now. They aren’t surfing the web posting reviews. These bad reviews are from people who can’t get the game, don’t have the game, or claim to be BF3 fans. Too bad their game isn’t enough fun to keep them from posting BS reviews about a game they haven’t even played.

    • Cool dude

      I enjoyed the Buggy Beta of MW3… although I had to pay $60 for it.

    • That Guy

      so youre saying only 600,000 people bought mw3? thats a shame. that means bf3 beat it 2:1. also, even if theyre playing it dont you think they can take a 5 minute break to write a review?

      please think about the logic behind what youre saying before you say it… or ill come stirke you down.

    • yOZES

      @ That Guy

      What?… 600,000 people are playing NOW… 9 million pre-orders and countless more copies sold over the counter since. Not everybody who bought the game is playing it at this very second, some people sleep, eat, go to school, have jobs, social lives, girlfriends, other interests besides video games etc. Think about the logic behind your comment before posting -_-
      And for the record, the game is most definately recycled, if you played video footage from mw2 and mw3 side by side, even the most loyal “fanboys” would be hard pressed to tell the difference. But that said, i bought bf3 day one, a brilliantly made game with a gorgeous new engine and sharp gameplay blah blah. then i bought cod and… i’m just not playing pf3 any more. i don’t know why, but cod is just more fun for me, even if it is the same crap.


      i have an opinion. this game sucks.

    • Bryan

      BattleFront 3 is better.

  • SadDude

    this game was a sad attempt at taking more money from the public. they relied too heavily on the brand name of the game for it to succeed. they merely said MW3 and kids wet their pants, so they did not really do a lot to improve the game. People who say, “Why fix something that is not broken?” well, because when i pay 60$ plus 50$ for Elite i want the bang out of my buck. i don’t want a game that i have already played and own. Arkham City, Skyrim, GTA5, BF3, and many other games better looking games, but MW3 chooses to stay in the past. i wish i hadn’t bought it, Activision and Infinity Ward need to learn how to make games again through failure.

    • Cool dude

      Bro, you don’t have to be sad. :(

      Its your choice…. No one forces you to pay for subscription. Heck, if you want COD elite… then pay for it, if you dont want it the DONT pay for it. Plus if you want to pay for xbox Live and play with an active community, then pay for it, if you want to stay Xbox live Silver or want to play a free online service, Play PSN or something.

      Don’t live outside your means, no ones stopping you.

      (Your sounding almost as though your insulting me with that name and/or trolling about Xbox 360 but ill give you the benefit of the doubt because im not Allen)

  • Jeb Bush

    It feels like a port on the PS3, I’m very dissapointed with this game. I think I’m going to stick with Battlefield 3 and trade in MM3 for Elder Scorlls Skyrim.

  • BIGRED15

    Well I’m actually suprised at the overwhelming negativity. Usually the die hard fans are louder than the more neutral player. Granted, half of these people are probably psychotic Fanboys that want to keep as many people from playing this game as possible.

    This may just mark a skid for cod. Things will have to improve next iteration for their dominance to continue


    I dislike Call of duty but I feel bad for the developers because their game is being attacked by thousands gamers. =(

    • Cool dude

      Infinity Ward deserves it, the same remake of the another game getting so much publicity and attention. I doubt MW3 went anywhere near the development cost of Crysis 2 or BF3 and skyrim. Yet its selling Twice if not 3x as much as the games of ACTUAL hardworking developers who make their game polished to perfection 24/7. I think that COD definitely deserves this from Gamers who only want fairness and justice.

      Basically what im saying is that why should a Lazy developer who remakes a same game annually get more attention, publicity, popularity and sales than a developer who tried to perfect his game for 4, 5 or even 6 years?

      I was shocked myself when I saw Youtube Multiplayer MW3 game plays, it seemed as though nothing has changed from its predecessors. It showed me that a Lazy Dev is getting billions and billions of cash money for releasing an obvious remake! While Bf3 (an obvious multiplayer wonder) will get less sales than MW3.

      Sorry but this is an outrage. Those gamers are vigilantes for all of us. Im not trolling im just expressing my opinion.

    • slikk66

      I bought COD1,2,4,5,6 for PC. I didn’t get black ops because I was let down at MW2 honestly.. the cheesballness was off the charts (flying knife ninjas) and it just felt like playing nerf or paintball or something, wasn’t “real” I guess.

      But I’m really LOL @ all the guys who thought this one would be different.. hell they didn’t even show footage of the game in the commercials, just basketball players playing it. That should tell you something.

      I’ve been playing BF3, but honestly I’m disappointed in that one as well, the entire kim-kardashian-ing of the gaming industry sucks a fat one.

  • Dazz

    lol. As if you would trust the Metacritic user scores. 80% probably haven’t played it or are just trolling. And the user reviews aren’t reliable…The average score for Portal 2 was 5

    • drake

      portal 2’s user rating is around 8 on all platforms, whereas modern warfare 3’s is abysmal, even if there was a lot of fanboys messing around with it, it’s quite different compared to modern warfare 2 and that too was hated. if it’s trolling the same can be said of battlefield, but this rating is so ridiculously low it might be true.

  • bozmanbeyond

    All I can say is WOW and not in a good way.

  • Dave

    its just a bunch of 15 down kids who get cod cause its cool and their all followers… get BF3 its a real game, even if you not hardcore, like me.

  • stixflix89

    I agree with all the negative comments here. I used to be a COD fanboy. I have ridiculous playing hours on both COD4 and MW2. I’d go as far as to say even Black Ops was amicably better than MW3. At least Treyarch tried new things. MW3 is a sorry, revamped excuse for a game. Ever since I touched BC2 i’ve been hooked on the franchise, and Battlefield 3 is NO let down. It is incredible and i’m having a wicked time playing it. Even Battlefield 1943 which is an old arcade classic is more fun than new MW3. Trading in for Skyrim (which looks hilariously good).

  • That Guy

    to the people saying” wow theres a lot of battlefield trolls downing the score.” do you think mabye lots of the people posting negative reviews are people who thought the game was gonna be good but then realised it didnt live up to the hype instead of just “stupidly biased fanboys of the other game”?

  • Stephen22

    I had high hopes for this CoD after Black Ops seriously disappointed me last year but damn. I completed the campaign in 4hrs 38mins according to the main menu, 4hr 38mins for a campaign? that’s at least an hour and a half shorter than Battlefield 3 and Medal of Honor’s campaigns, two games that were criticised a fair amount because of how short they were, but I haven’t read one single review that points out that MW3’s campaign lasts 4 and a half hours and there’s better players than me out there who I have no doubt could beat it in less than 4. There’s no doubt in my mind that when it comes to media reviews this franchise will never be heavily criticised. As for the multiplayer well it’s CoD, it’s the same game I bought back in 2007 when it was called CoD4: Modern Warfare, all it has now is a few new weapons, a few new killstreak rewards and some new maps. I’m done with CoD games until they get a brand new game engine and physics and the gameplay changes enough to merit it being called a new game.

  • Raven

    User reviews on metacritc are the worse. Gears, uncharted 3, cod, battlefield, doesn’t matter, their all flooded with bogus reviews.

    Personally I trust amazon verified purchases the most now.

  • valgore

    I have loved Call Of Duty from the beggining and have enjoyed the games for many hours so when i got this i was like a kid all over again but that feeling left after about an hour!! Im walking around and i feel like i know all the maps already??? The graphics have not changed at all and the thing that confuses me most is that you can pick a sniper class but none of the maps accomidate that class unless u put an acog on it. There are no open maps at all!!! It is all close combat and a complete campers paradise lol. Like people have said already but i feel i must say it again “MW3 is a merge of MW2 and BO there is nothing new here at all!! For me and alot of my friends it really does feel like we have paid for a game now that feels like its 4yrs old. Sorry for the bad opinion but this is just terible!!!

  • piñeraconchetumare

    the sad part is that in activision and infinity ward they are reading this and saying “i know right lol” while wiping their asses with money

  • Jaawhn

    > MW3 is the same thing over and over.
    It’s part of a series, so of course it’d be similar, otherwise it wouldn’t fit in. Derp.
    Also, what about BF3 and BF2? All I see is more bloom and lens flare with new weapons.
    hurr durr, mw3 is rehas derp.
    -plays BF3 which is just a prettier BF2.-

    What I’m trying to say is, all these arguments are stupid and invalid.
    All FPS are just the same thing rehashed anyways, so stop arguing and play the damn game. :)

  • Trevor

    Totally agree with the article and majority of the comments.

    MW3 is tired. This is why most of Infinity Ward left the studio… they didn’t want to rehash the same cash cow anymore… and Activision threw a hissy fit. They were promised they could work on and new IP… and Bobby reneged.

    At least Treyarch TRIES to do something new every other year.

  • Br@D

    Ha i got on this morning…..94 negative reviews! Im having a blast with the game. Not all gamers think a like.

  • Heard it here first

    I believe I said it wouldn’t outsell BF3 a few weeks ago. I also said it wouldn’t be the new best selling game of all time. Its getting old, even to the fans.

  • Bacon

    Activision’s tag line for next cod game “better than ever in every way possible” n people will still believe that bs

  • Bacon

    If it was priced at $35-40 then people wouldn’t complain as much maybe, so would today be called “a tragic moment in gaming history”

  • Bacon

    I wonder how parents would react if they realized they spent $60 on a game for their child when it turns out you could get the similar game for $15-20 used

  • HungGreeHypo

    Hey I am having some fun with the game but by no means blown away. The criticism is deserved though, very little was changed just a handful of features were added. The game was just not brave at all, their comfort zone has gotten too comfy.

  • Ben

    Ive been a huge fan of the series and have spend many hours online. So when I played the multiplayer for the first time I noticed something different (just the way the game felt when moving) I couldnt quite understand what it was but I thought that would be normal considering Sledgehammer Games had a hand in developing it. Ive been playing for 3 hours on multiplayer and the only way I can describe it is to say it feels cheap and nasty. I hate to say this about a series of games ive been an avid fan for, for many years, but this sucks! The singleplayer feels just like every other COD but as soon as you step on to Multiplayer thats when it turns cheap and nasty. Sledgehammer should not have developed the multiplayer as they have ruined it!!

  • Zentrix

    This game is fun and this metacritic user score is a pathetic attempt by bf fanboys stuck on that battlefield cock. Lol Ima get back online with my buddies now and guess what??? Play the fuckin game hehe

    • Stephen22


      That was probably the most immature post this article will get. Not only have you come across as an immature CoD fanboy yourself, you’re argument also lost all credibility when you typed that the way a 12 year old schoolkid would.

    • abc


  • greenthumb66

    Not a bad game but it is just a rehash of the same old CoD gameplay.

  • Roach

    @Photon_Embargo What Jaawhn specifically said is that Bf3 is a prettier Bf2, and that the core battlefield gameplay has stayed the same since 1942, which is true. All sequels are just re-hashes of the original product, Activision has just a much better job exposing it. Legend of Zelda, Mario, Battlefield, Halo, Uncharted, Portal/any Valve game, Command and Conquer, etc. (i.e any successful series out there) are just prettier versions of their original. Why hasn’t Zelda received a 2.9 user rating despite the fact that nothing has changed since the original (or Ocarina if you feel so)? Why hasn’t Mario been marked down (and Super Mario Galaxy 2 recieve a 98 Metacritic) when all they do is add small improvements from the original? Why does Halo:Reach have a 91 Metacritic is the gameplay is “samey” since CE. Why doesn’t Valve get criticized for using the same Source engine since CS:S, or re-packaging buildings from Half-Life onto their newer games? Why hasn’t Bioware got marked down even though the formula hasn’t changed since KOTOR, and only the setting has changed? While I agree MW3 seems very similar to MW2 (and plays virtually identical) if we are to give mw3 such flack for being unimaginative, then almost every successful franchise should get marked down at least 10 points for being “samey”.

    • Photon_Embargo

      I agree BF3 is prettier, but I also think it is more immersing than BF2. I have this desire for games to become parallel universes, and other games and game experiences become benchmarks to closing that gap. If Skyrim came out and looked and played very close to Oblivion, I would spit chips, and I would most certainly not want to pay full cost.

      I do see the point about core gameplay, but core gameplay with minimal other improvements? The social media aspects of gaming that is becoming a feature these days is somehow meant to be making up for actual game improvements these days, but I just want to play good games, and have fresh experiences.

      BF3 is similar in play to BF2, but it is still a fresh experience because it looks totally different, and has totally different ambiance and the maps are greatly varied.

      And as for franchises, the Elder Scrolls, C&C, Civilization, Total War are ones that come to mind that have worked hard to look better, bring in new elements and change feeling (although not always with success) and essentially play like new games each time – and I appreciate that.

      Ones that give up freshness and innovation of some sort, deserve to die, for example, the Unreal Tournament franchise, which went from amazing and innovative to same game, almost same graphics, same feeling, the further down the line it went.

      All that aside, I’ve played games for a long time, and I don’t get excited about games like I used to unless they really earn their stripes…

    • nick

      Because every game has problems. these are sequels that fix problems, rather than blatantly disregarding them (cough cod cough)

  • Bacon

    Future breaking news: “sledgehammer unexpectedly disbanded” anyone shocked if it happened?

    • Stephen22

      Can’t really blame Sledgehammer to be honest, they’ll have had no creative freedom at all with this game, they’ll have been handed the software and hardware to make the multiplayer aspect and a list of what’s to be done and told to get on with it. Activision and Infinity Ward would have had all the say.

  • HahaLosers

    They’re a bunch of socially deprived nerds, typing their nerd raging, textual stress relief comments from their mother’s basement. That’s it. Their opinions are baseless and worthless. You’ll note that most of them went to Battlefield 3, and gave that a 10. Their lives revolve around “game vs. game” and “console vs. console” arguments, because on a personal level, they never have, and never will accomplish anything. They’re insecure fools trying to delude themselves into believing they have worth. They’ll still be doing the same thing with a different game, and a different console in five years. They’re cowards who fear life…

    I’d support this game, even if I didn’t like it, simply because I know for a fact, that through buying the game, some socially worthless nerd will stress himself out, undoubtedly shortening his life, and thus bettering the world, as sooner than later, he’d no longer serve as a detrimental leech to society. Modern gamers, what a joke! They’d rather argue about video games, than play video games. Overstressed, intellectually void trash! It’s amusing how they seem to perpetuate their own stress though, by fueling the fire amongst each other, with “game vs. game” arguments and such. All and all, it’s nothing but a bunch of insecure, mindless children hopping on a trend. The same trend that started the Modern Warfare craze. Don’t worry, you’ll better acknowledge the unoriginal gameplay and such being pushed in the BF series, two more games down the line.

    What an ironic moment that will be! And they’ll all act as if it’s perfectly acceptable to act as if they suddenly despise the series, simply because another trend will come flooding by. The only difference is, I don’t remember Modern Warfare 1 players being as insecure as you children. They just played their game and enjoyed it, same as they continue to do. That’s what adults do…

    I’ll have my copy soon, and like them, I’ll be enjoying myself. I grew up on cartridge games though, so I know how to let the frustrating moments go, and just enjoy the game for what it is. I’ve only played one multiplayer game for almost a year now, so I can’t wait! Too many single player games, although, with children like you, I tend to prefer them most of the time.

    It’s rated M for a reason…

    • JoeBlow

      Dude you seriously need to slow your role and not get all “Dr Phil” on the multiplayer gaming industry. Faceless or not we all have a right to express our opinions on whether or we think a certain feature, DLC or entire game at that is even worth purchasing. People go to these websites in hopes of learning whether or not a game is worth their hard earned money or just a rent.

    • Adam

      The reason people are so upset over it is because the graphics AREN’T very improved, and you’re essentially paying $60 for new killstreaks and maps. Halo at least tried new things every game. Halo 2 had duel wielding and Arbiter, 3 had lots of new weapons and the Forge, ODST was a completely different game with a dark noir story and new game modes, and Reach had armor classes, another stand alone story and an absolutely incredible Forge World.

      The last Battlefield was made six years ago. It was time for another main franchise reboot, and I see nothing wrong with it. Its a great game that is a lot different than Battlefield 2, while still feeling like the series.

      And I’m sorry…who the is criticizing Bioware? Bioware makes tons of unique games. Their RPG’s follow the same conversation format usually, but that’s about the only similarities.

      I’m not going to get mad if people buy MW3 and like it. I’m just going to feel sorry for you because you blew your money on Modern Warfare 2 v 1.0.1

      @ HeavensWarrior No, I’m actually pretty good at CoD and I still don’t like it. That’s not saying much though considering my 6 year old brother can play Black Ops and get a positive K/D in matches. And professional critic ratings don’t matter tard. Get your own opinion and stop being a sheep.

    • blazeup

      this psycho needs a chill pill

    • abc


      you sir are an IDIOT

    • YouAngryTrollsAreFunny

      They’re a bunch of socially deprived nerds, typing their nerd raging, textual stress relief comments from their mother’s basement. That’s it. Their opinions are baseless and worthless. You’ll note that most of them went to Battlefield 3, and gave that a 10. Their lives revolve around “game vs. game” and “console vs. console” arguments, because on a personal level, they never have, and never will accomplish anything. They’re insecure fools trying to delude themselves into believing they have worth. They’ll still be doing the same thing with a different game, and a different console in five years. They’re cowards who fear life…

      I’d support this game, even if I didn’t like it, simply because I know for a fact, that through buying the game, some socially worthless nerd will stress himself out, undoubtedly shortening his life, and thus bettering the world, as sooner than later, he’d no longer serve as a detrimental leech to society. Modern gamers, what a joke! They’d rather argue about video games, than play video games. Overstressed, intellectually void trash! It’s amusing how they seem to perpetuate their own stress though, by fueling the fire amongst each other, with “game vs. game” arguments and such. All and all, it’s nothing but a bunch of insecure, mindless children hopping on a trend. The same trend that started the Modern Warfare craze. Don’t worry, you’ll better acknowledge the unoriginal gameplay and such being pushed in the BF series, two more games down the line.

      What an ironic moment that will be! And they’ll all act as if it’s perfectly acceptable to act as if they suddenly despise the series, simply because another trend will come flooding by. The only difference is, I don’t remember Modern Warfare 1 players being as insecure as you children. They just played their game and enjoyed it, same as they continue to do. That’s what adults do…

      I’ll have my copy soon, and like them, I’ll be enjoying myself. I grew up on cartridge games though, so I know how to let the frustrating moments go, and just enjoy the game for what it is. I’ve only played one multiplayer game for almost a year now, so I can’t wait! Too many single player games, although, with children like you, I tend to prefer them most of the time.

      It’s rated M for a reason…

  • Roach

    @Photon_Embargo Agreed, what pisses me off is this double-standard we gamers hold, that Mario and Zelda must stay the same (because God forbid Link and Mario don’t have to save the princess), yet if Call of Duty or Final Fantasy now do it, a 2.9 Metacritic is waiting. Though out of curiousity, what was your take of New Vegas, as you seem against games that are markedly similar to their predecessors?

    • Photon_Embargo

      I haven’t played Fallout New Vegas, but I hear it plays quite different.

      I think two games close together on the same engine is probably acceptable.

      But really, I think if companies want to release new games for a franchise each year over 3 or 4 years, and it uses the same or very close to same engine, and layout and play style, it should be called what it is: an EXPANSION.

  • lol

    It’s just more of the same with a little bit more.

    Cod isn’t bad, it’s great, but if you do the same thing over and over again and try to sell it for a huge with a few perks, it just isn’t going to go too well.

    Battlefield has changed its theme numerous times. Hell, it went to the year 2142 and what a blast that was.

    In battlefield, we’ve been through vietnam, a present time war setting, future war setting, and now battlefield 3, which raises the bar of what 2 did with very significant improvement.

    Call of duty has done little over the course of time to do much. The first 2 games were amazing in every possible way.

    Three was not too good, as it, well, fell to more of the same.

    Four raised the bar so much, it was overhyped. But it deserved the attention, and was a best seller.

    Five tried some new things, but kind of fell a bit short. I mean, WWII again? Just a new setting? been there done that…

    Six felt a bit rushed, and compared to 4’s greatness, it was just a lower quality rehash.

    Seven? Well they again tried new things. But it wasn’t executed so well. Infact, it was horrible.

    As for eight, here we are, it falls to the same thing 6 and 7 did. Modern warfare 3 is more of the same, and dumbfounds us due to it’s familiarity, and rushed design. Feels like 2 all over again.

    What have I to say? Well infinty ward, it’s been good, it’s been a highly abused franchise, but you’re getting served by not only battlefield fanatics, but by some of your very once loyal fans alike. And honestly, either innovate to death, or drop the franchise. Because as I speak, you’re losing fans.

    Want a suggestion? Perhaps this never came to mind?

    Call of Duty: Future Warfare (Just think about it…)

    Really… it’s doable…….

    Crysis 2 cant tell cod shit really, it is a ripoff, but inf ward, do something, we want to see something else.

    And if you dare, make the same game, with a different name. If it comes to that, you’re not going to have respect from me, or much of anyone anymore.

  • Balsa22

    What a waste of money!!! Battlefield 3 is way better!! Modern warfare 3 feels just like mw2!! Played for 30 min and shut it off!!!

  • Gman

    I was starting to lose hope for gamers in general, but I think there is still hope after reading all those user reviews.

  • Roach

    @Gman I agree to a certain extent. While I think most reviewers were spot on when it came to assessing the game, and why they thought it was “rinse-and-repeat”, I thought that they let their emotions (or fanboyism, however you want to look at it) get the better of them and as such their score was too low. To me, a 0-4 implies that the game is broken beyond repair (E.T, Blackwater, Superman64, Naughty Bear, Big Rigs Racing) and has so many problems that it is unplayable and just not fun to play. Cod deserves at least a 5, but no more than an 8 (or 9 if you ABSOLUTELY loved it) as it does feel re-hashed , but it is playable, and can be very fun, depending on who you are. It is not a bad game, persay, it just feels “samey” and not very innovative.

  • Zentrix

    @hahalosers couldn’t have said it better myself. These fools on this site are on that battlefield cock. Let zelda stay the same but cod is a no no. Wow that is hardcore poetry.

    • abc

      dont be such a n 18 year old homosexual.

      youre pathetic. 18 year old still trolling in the internet. 18 year olds should be pounding poontang pies not b!tch about a game adults play.

      turn off the computer and read some flash or fantastic four or whatever comics you have nerd

  • Untrue

    Several million people buy, play and enjoy mw3 on launch day but about two hundred trolls spam metacritic (something that happens with every big release) and that constitutes the “majority” of gamers disappointed and hating the game? What kind of nonsense reporting is this?

    You people have to start to understand that the people who write these articles and those who comment on then are not real people. You’re not gamers, you’re just angry, hyper critical, over privileged little jerks who simply can’t stand to see people enjoying life. Whether its a happy couple in love, children playing and having fun, it’s all too much for such hate filled monsters, you have to yell “retard 12 year olds!!!” and storm away. Seek help, get counselling, you’re mentally ill.

    • Fielder

      Rather bizarre comment and psychoanalysis as well.

    • abc

      Gago putang ina mo

    • Cool dude

      Pinoy ako, pinoy tayo!

    • abc

      kaya ka pala cool hehehe!

  • Greendog

    Modern Warefare 3 is a joke, how in gods name did they get away with this rubbish, Black ops out shines this a million to one. I will be returning this crap tomorrow
    Black ops was different and very real to me the guns sounded the part and looked different MW3 guns all look and sound the same I can’t even tell which team is which everyone looks the same total disappointment

  • Jacob

    Ha Ha Ha..this is what just happened. EA launched apparently their so called ” breakthrough phenomenon” based on a shiny new engine with a kickass name. And while launching they attacked their biggest competitor and bashed them right left and centre.
    Battlefield 3 released and OMFG the game was a dampner. Single player was a joke and multiplayer was as good as the last BF: Bad Company game..the graphics of the shiny new engine were so very disappointing.Players thrashed it, critics didnt.

    And then the big bro was set to release. Their silence was again the evidence of the recent debacle of their competitor’s baby. It is good when your hyped competitor fails. You cant do worse than the worst, can you?

    And aho…MW3 just did it!!!.

    Friends what we just witnessed was the battle of hyped heroes turning out to be the plain vanilla duds. And with that the battle hopefully ends here.

    Happy gaming with Batman: Arkhum City and Uncharted: Drakes Deception..some hype is justfied afterall.

  • think about it

    Think about it, all those comments are from people that don’t like it cuz the few million f***ing people that still havent gotten off the game.. like me its far more fun then bf3 . I was exited for both, but I couldn’t stand the slow level progressing and dry large maps and over all feel of bf3 it shows on the critics reviews , and its an amazing game the graphics are upgraded Idk why people are hating

  • Alsorts

    I made the mistake of buying this yesterday. Had some spare money and took the chance – big mistake.
    I will be trading this in at the weekend (before if I can get out of work) and will purchase BF3 instead. I have played both story and multi-player modes and BF3 wins on both fronts for me. MW3 in conclusion is a big disappointment.

  • lame

    I got this game late yesterday afternnon and played it last night and all of the negative comments i have read in this article are true except for the MW2.5 comment, it’s more like MW1.9.

    Activision / IW really dropped the ball on this one.

    • dylan

      sorry fag i didnt mean to like your comment.

    • lame

      Its okay gaylan

  • Thal

    Finally COD fans have had enough. They want ideas and change instead of the crap they’ve put out since WaW.

    You know what happened….the 15 year old kids that bought COD4 grew up

  • blazeup

    damn….up to last nite i was still considering getting this…..i’ll pass on this one….maybe in a few years i’ll give cod a try again…til then its only battlefield for me

    • dylan

      mw3 is amazing , like i said in my earlier comment.. only the people who dont like a game are gonna come on here, cuz the ones who do like it are too busy playing it.. and these are all bf3 fanboy kids. im a fan of both and hands down graphics aside mw3 is better in every way.. its alot different then mw2 and for the better. MW3 graphics are just under par with bf3 as well not bad by any means. buy it and you will love it. progression is so much smoother, and more indepth, and more fun.. this is the best online shooter to date.

    • blazeup

      you should get your eyes checked becuz the visual aspect of the game is one of the biggest letdowns ppl are talkin about….yea and that best online shooter comment……..u really f**ked up in the head for that!!

    • abc

      dylan = virgin

  • Mike

    So out of 10, what do you all rate it?

  • Turkish

    most of these so called critics are payed to say good things about the game. I listen more to the fans than i do to the critics in my opinion i knew MW3 would be bad but i bought it anyway and tomorrow im going to trade it in it sucks.

  • Norman

    I haven’t played it yet but I think this is for the best. The series has been getting stale and could use a swift kick in the rear to get them working again. But I still can’t imagine it’s as bad as people are saying. Worth $60? probably not. but I bet it’s at least a 7/10.

  • Heavenswarrior121

    Lol i agree with dont see no mw3 fans on here..i harley been on here but you do see every battlefail fan boy here..the game is amazing enough said,and it seems like those critics are bf fan boys to or they just suck and are noobs…either way mw3 still git rated higher then bf3 so

    • abc

      youre pathetic

      mw3 is all you have that youll defend it to death.

      mommy wouldnt get you anything for christmas anymore thats why you treat your “precious” mw3 like its the best thing youve had since sliced bread.

      i pity you.

      really i do

    • Alsorts

      I was, and still am a COD fan – my opinion is that MW3 just doesn’t live up to the hype. The maps are awful and it all feels a little out-dated. The kids have jumped on the band wagon with COD in the last few years, hence the people defending it with bad attitudes on here.

  • Mike

    Or it could be that people who play Battlefield have jobs and girlfriends so don’t get time to play all day everyday.

    • blazeup

      there’s a strong possibility that you’re right

  • Black_Napalm

    If I was on the fence about MW3 I defiantly would have said fuck it now. It’s way too high of a number to just be BF trolls and all there points are valid reasons for me to not want this game. CoD is dead to me.

  • AKA Zzz

    Who cares? This game is amazing. The people who are angry at the game are obviously going to be the most vocal. Who is actually going to waste their time uploading a GOOD meta rating when they could be playing the game?

    • nick

      Because if that were true anyone who even likes cod a little MUST be playing cod 24 hours a day without taking any breaks to do anything.

    • AKA Zzz

      I didn’t say that. I questioned why they would waste their time uploading a “good review” when they could be playing the game. It would obviously have to be done in their free time, which is spent playing the game.

    • abc

      @AKA ZZZ

      it is evident by now that even if you post comments that really make sense that you will get thumbed down because nobody in this site really likes you.

      expect that everytime you post that you will get at least 1 thumb down coming from your arch enemy. i wont say his name anymore because you already know who he is.

    • AKA Zzz


  • Greendog

    I am not a bf3 fanboy I just think mw3 is rehashed rubbish. I have tried so hard to like it playing 5 hours already but it is just frustrating poor Black ops will be put back until I find a better shooter

  • Jake

    So dissaponted, search and destroy in mw3 is horrid, the maps prevent good gameplay, there a mess, there’s no flow to the game, te maps are too big and too messy, what happened to maps like wasteland? All the maps feel clogged and frustrating. Cod 4 will always be the best because it was simple and easy in the sense that the maps were quick and suited the style of call of duty online, mw2 was ok too, but this is a mess, single player was far far to short, and boring, and online is very ‘samey’ but with in workable maps. Poor.

  • turtle

    You guys can complain all you want about this game. Im enjoy the hell out of this game and BF3. They’re both awesome, I love the fact that I have this kind of verity. I’m not touching those metacritic reviews like some troll. I’m in a win win situation here. Can’t wait to expand my verity with Batman, Uncharted, Mario 3D and any other game I can get my hands on. Until then going to defend some conquest points with a tank and call in a AC 130 so I can get some dog tags LOL.

  • turtle

    FYI if there is one thing that I will agree on is that Black Ops was terrible!

  • Heavenswarrior121

    Did he say bitch ops was better then mw3?? Please sir go drink a gallon of bleach..smh humans these days,mw3 is great just like mw and mw2, battlefield 3 has been worked on for 6 years? And mw3 for a year and some months and mw3 STILL MANAGED TO BE SCORED HIGHER THEN battlefail 3 that tells you something dumb asses..

    That makes ea and dice look stupid,i would be upset if i put 6 years of hard work into ine game and activision and IW worked on a game for a year and still made the better game smh let the haters hate mw3 is the king of fps games again next year…

    Hopefully next cod wont be black ops 2 -_- god no make a future mw game

    • abc

      nobody likes you

  • Don

    might as well just call it COD: Modern Warfare 2012 and next year 2013. Don’t even bother calling it a sequel!

    • josh

      might as well just release Mod1 in HD.
      lol I’d say that’s what MOD3 is but it’s got that subres lowdef. whattttt!?!?!

  • Tavish

    Modern Warefare 3 the sound qaulity of the microphone chatting system is RUBBISH and i mean rubbish big time.i bought 3 copies of this game( 2 have been traded in already) the lads my sons have said chating to your mates on the game is as big a deal as the game itself .On battle field 3 its not great either but its alot better than modern warefare 3 i will give this a week for an update or its binned for good

    I use the magic eye web cam built in mic my lad uses turtle type headphones

    if its a cheap server problem with MW 3 get it sorted people have paid enough to deserve a decent way of chatting TO THERE MATES IN GAME( upgrade the server another thing people cant get into games first time maybe 5 times to get into a game really really pissed off i have a freinds list of 100 people they all say the same thing sort this sound problem codecs or server or what ever it is or this game going into the wheely bin.

  • ian

    Okay having played the game for about 7 hours today as a family member bought a copy this is how any fair real review of the game should be in line with.
    Graphics: 5.5/10 While the game has had some slight improvements over the previos MW title the overall feel and look is about the same. With graphics what would have been Considered “good” in 2007 it is not a bad looking game but there is really nothing to it and for a huge franchise like this it is a disappointment. Note this game on console is a Sub-HD res 1028*600
    Gameplay: 6.5/10 The gameplay is still the same base that Call of Duty has always had the shooting is nice for the most part with a good pace to it. But the game lacks anything new apart from some equipment you can place. apart from that it is the same old run and gun game play that we have seen before feels like a return to the past. old but still quite solid.
    Sound: 6/10 While some of the sound is nice and crisp there are many other parts what sound flat. several of the voices have good depth and some nice voice acting. some of the explosions are of an acceptable level but nothing special the big let down is the gun noise sounds like air soft guns. the only highlight of the sound is the feedback from hitting someone and the fact that foot steps are nice and clear.
    Overall 6/10 While this game is 100% another CoD title it yet again fails to take the franchise anywhere new. If you want more of the same in new maps and a few new game modes then you would consider buying this new game but if you wanted something new then give this one a miss.
    Think of this as MW2 refined. (Don’t buy on PC the FoV is set to 65 and has a very high chance to make you feel sick after playing for more than 1 hour

  • Hydrus

    Ok played thru the campaign and about 5 hours online in both modes. You can tell this game was not made by the original founders of IW. I don’t think I’ll be spending as much time with this game as I did the first 2. Even though BF3 and has in essence only 3 types of game modes online, it just seams to feel fresher and more fun. MW3 just feels like a really expensive map pack.

  • ADz

    il have say my two cents i brought BF3 and have played the hell out of and was a massive COD mw 2 fan prestiged 5 times and also a massive BAD company fan but when i saw the what BF3 offered vs MW3 i picked BF3 straight away was not going to buy mw3 but a deal at store where i got MW3 and £25 psn credit i just jumped but do i believe that BF3 is the better game better maps more different types of game play as in how you play multiplayer different map environments lush green fields and air battles and then night time city battles and many different guns and more coming with the back to karkland DLC and free stat tracking with battlelog and i have played COD mw 3 multiplayer today and it was fun at first but then i just started seeing the same old things perks, gun, the maps made slightly bigger to give you a bigger feel of scale but the do not deliver and felt sort of robbed of even my £20 as the £25 psn cred is going of games on PSN network and i do think that IW have bin very lazy with this title and the question of that if its such a big game and do they have to keep innovating the game YES its only fair to us the gamers and people who give these people there living yes we do and why shouldn’t we??? when uncharted and battlefield and many other games will constantly give us something new and better than before on xbox and ps3 IW have been very lazy and have sat and grown fat and big headed in the success which ultimately sad as MW3 had the chance to be the best game of of theses gen consoles but they thought better to not build new and to make better an engine that really should be laid to rest they should have more attention on story, new engine better looking visuals and something different than grey dinghy maps rather than massive explosions

  • Greendog

    I agree with Ian the sound is poor I can’t even sleek to mates on the headset because it crackles. And you cant join a mate online during a game unless they invite you. Even when you do join together at the main menu one of you always gets booted before playing, really annoying. The stats menu is poor as well

  • nick

    OK just finished a 2 hour MW3 rental trial. There are things about that are surprisingly good, and other things about it that are straight up abysmal. Multiplayer review coming soon.

  • Cool dude

    You should write for this site lol

  • Isaac forde

    During the cod xp intro Iw talked about how this game was for “you and your friends.” Now I may ask how you get 1 other person out of friends. The one thing that may potentially could have saved me trading this game in is the survival mode which is crap BECAUSE it’s only 2 player co op. Seriously? You put out a game with multiplayer that is still plagued with the same server problems mw2 had and then had the balls to say it’s vastly improved…? And then release a new mode to “compete” with nazi zombies and make it 2 player? Avoid this game. This is the last Iw made cod I will ever buy. Props to trey arch for their release of BOps last year, a game you could actually sit down with your friends and have a good time.

  • Richyd33

    People who are surprised graphics havn’t improved are idiots.When a muti release game is made it has a 8.7gb content limit thanks to xbox.To improve graphics or lengthen campaign u need more disc space or multiple discs like battlefield for xbox.But multiple discs is a joke lets hope mw4 is ps3 exclusive with 50gb of content.Not because im a fanboy but because games like this need to improve n ditch dvd’s limits

    • nick

      Or you could get a much better optimized engine. RAGE runs in 60fps with 3x better graphics.

  • Usaf

    Alot of people want big changes that blow them away. Comparing changes from battle field 2 to battle field 3 which does not come out every year, does it?
    They made changes in Blackopp and it sucked. Had to go back and play MW2 and skipped blackopp. All my friend also traded away their black opp. COD fan have been playing this series for a while and we dont need huge changes, subtle changes that make the gameplay more fun more competitve more balance, less cheap stuff is what we are looking for. And all of you haters who asks you to buy COD every year, buy it every 2 year or every 3 years(etc) and maybe you will see a noticable changes like battlefield 3 when it came after a while. The game graphic did not blow me away!!!!, But the depth added to the game did, Go play encharted 3 if you play game for amazing graphic, when it comes to multiplayer games it all bout game play and no one does it better than COD,most playing game out there. Battlefiled 3 was really good in less than a month I got bored of it. MW2 i played for 2 years. 60$ for one month of gameplay vs 60$ for 2 years of gameplay. Do the math. BF is nothing compared to COD, both series have been out for long time.
    Go trade your MW3 for a game you going to finish in a week and let COD fan get it at a discounted price,
    Thank you

    • nick

      The English Language

    • Bryan

      I disagree I think BattleFront is way better than Call of Duty.

  • ydriht

    I think the poor quality of the game may be linked to the poor education system in America. This is why we need to change our government

    • nick

      ummm trolololololo

  • Brent

    How can you know it sucks until you buy it? You can’t blame the purchasers. I find the worst to be the absolute idiotic lack of dedicated servers. The only ones are tucked away behind options menu and are all unranked with everything unlocked. Where is the fun in that? Major gigantic step backwards from Black Ops. Its like no one at Infinity Ward even plays call of duty. Get the server system right. Its the freaking basics.

  • TWB

    You know what I think is funny about this is that more than half of the gamers include Battlefield 3 while bashing MW3. This makes me think that they are just Battlefield fans trying to make gamers avoid MW3. Grow up people MW3 is not perfect but is still very enjoyable.

  • TWB

    One thing is for sure: NONE OF THE HATERS ARE COD FAN, they are all BF fan trying to bash COD by pretending to be a COD fan.

  • nonameturd

    Thank you Activision for killing such a great franchise.

  • Patrick

    Wow the English and overall grammar on here is pretty appalling!
    BF3 < MW3

  • Patrick

    Talking of bad grammar, I got my greater than/less than sign wrong. Anybody with a brain will have realised that I meant BF3 > MW3.. for numerous reasons.

Related Popular Modern Warfare 3 Content