Does Modern Warfare's third entry live up to the bang we've come to expect of the series? Get ready to enlist for World War III in this exclusive review.
Get More: GameTrailers.com, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 - Review, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360
Better score than BF3. I know where this is heading...
the MP is trying to be more team objective, i doubt it will work, with all the things they said, idk how the game got the 9.3 when they said the SP is the shortest yet, no co-op and the similar MP that CoD is known for
They even spell out how the game elements are being recycled. Seems like the game walks free on that account :s
~Team objective, hey that's just a bonus, games don't have to be team based to be good. ~SP - COD is for an online play, and even then the SP is the still better then any other military shooter. ~Co-op? Again this game is a MP game ~Similar MP, yup and I couldn't be any happier. Grow up bro, This game is great, why can't you accept it?
you're shelling out $60 for MP i don't understand why you are trying to argue against SP, the amount of money spent on this game, you would think that they would make the SP more engaging, you are just making it easier for Activision to not give a damn about SP and just focus on the same MP
its all subjective really, im a battlefield fan personally but if someone like modern warfare its there right i guess.
I kind of predicted that they'd let it slide under the "it's the CoD we know and love". Well, at least they push the point that 'if you come to this game expecting something new, you will be dissapointed'.
Now I get what Activision spend their budget on. There's so many complaints in this review about linearity, on-rails sequences and ridiculous killstreaks, yet GT end up whipping out a 9.3/10 score for it. Kotick must have deep pockets. @iistuii - Unlike Activision, Naughty Dog up their game and raise the bar with every outing of Uncharted. Activision gets a free pass instead of being nitpicked like other less commercially succesful titles imo.
i wonder how much it cost them to get jonah hill, sam worthington and dwight howard to make the next iteration of "there is a soldier in all of us"
Did naughty dog also pay them of along with IGN ? C'mon, if you've actually got it and don't like it then fine, but I'm going along in the campaign and it's great stuff honestly. Ott mass mayhem fun.
Look I'm not havin a go, but you havent even got the game, i know as you stated in an earlier post, and you accusing reviewers of bias. When or if you play the game then moan as much as you like, personally I'm enjoying it and it's a blast, and I can honestly see why its getting the great reviews.
9.3? Did Activisions check bounce or something?. Was thinking GT especially would give it a 10. Interesting.
If game is fun, well, then game is fun. I for one enjoyed BOPS and that is my first CoD/online shooter experience ever in my 28 yrs on planet earth. With that said I purchased BF3 (my first BF aswell) a week ago and I will not be picking up another CoD unless something radical happens to the series. I just like BF's multiplayer that much more. Plus, it's crazy fun to play with your friends in the same squad. Each to his own I guess, but I'll pass on MW3 and I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything at all. (PS. Didn't expect GT to give them that high of a score. Congrats, Activision. DS)
It better had gotten a 9. Honestly three, count them THREE studios were working on this game. Anything less is unacceptable. Good job COD. I'll be playing battlefield lol.
Every other game gets slammed for being similiar as previous games and not innovating but if its cod thats doing it then its a good thing... Gametrailers must be laughing to the bank aswell after that very generous donation from activision.
It's da payoff!!11!! Lol.... You guys.
Hmmm.... Someone must be paying N4G users to disagree with me.... Lol
Double post... The plot thickens.
@ majie - Humm.. I'm not sure I'm buying in to the corrupt paid sites... At least not to such a massive extent. Sure, commercial space = benefits & cash and I'm sure there's a little bit of stroking alongside - but if a site is downright blackmailed, their integrity will plummeth and they may as well shut down entirely. I DO however agree with you on the recycling bit. I don't see how it makes sense to praise a game for failing to reinvent itself while bashing similar titles for borrowing previously praised elements. Judge a game for its own merits and flaws.
WHat a joke. Honestly. They know rating COD lower will make casuals and children foam at the mouth. and parents too! COD MW1.2.3 is usually used a Babysitting and parenting tool to teach,educate and watch your kids when you dont want to in todays world.
You seem to be foaming at the mouth enough for everyone. We know, you prayed for poor reviews, never mind, better luck with next years COD eh...
Hell Yeah, Can't wait to be playing this. Between this and Battlefield 3, I'll be knee deep in death for some time to come!!! >:D
Watch all the cod haters cry, whaaaaaaaaa someone likes a game i don't. I feel so alone everyone loves call of duty, whaaaaaaaaa. Fucking joke really, don't like a game ignore it leave it alone, don't spend your days crying over something you will never play. Oh wait your probably 3rd prestige already ;)
Couldn't have put it better myself.
hmmm they said in there BF3 review there was no boats :)
I'm a bit confused, as the review sounded quite negative about a lot of important points, and they dish out a 9.3 as its score?
Just because they mentioned a few negatives, doesn't mean the positives weren't overwhelming, which they were...
It's not the number of negatives that made me surprised at the score, it's the weight of the negatives they mentioned that makes me surprised about the score.
Strange, GT says that there is a certain "sameness" in online, and the campaign is like before. Yet they still gave it a high score. 8.4 for a story that was hard to follow? They usually mark down games that don't offer anything new. I guess COD is an exception.
i agree with what most are saying, 'cod is just the same every year' atc etc, i havnt bought cod since mw2 and i wont buy another till they actually put some propa effort in instead of rehashing the same game every year. but..... on the other hand i dont think any game should loose marks because its too much like the previous game, each game shud be reviewd on its own merrit and not be compared to another in the series. im sure as a stand alone game mw3 is a great fps and deserves a 9/10. tho personaly im sick to death of cod, once uv played cod4 uv basically played em all. tho if u still love it after what seems like a decade old game. good for u, enjoy it. Also while every1 keeps buying it activision will carry on being lazy. u cant blame them tho, it must cost hardly anything to develop compared to other games an they make a mint selling it. good buisness decision, we shudnt be hateing activision, we shud be blaming the fools who keep buying it year in year out. only wen the sales dip will activision even think of making a fresh game. il just wait for tht day if it ever happens an il buy cod again then
I agree with everything you said, and I feel the same way. However, what I don't get is that reviewers, especially game-trailers, mark down many games for being similar and not offering anything new. Yet they don't do this with COD. Even though most people can clearly see that the game is a rehash. I don't get this.
Ye me either its double standards. I think games should just never loose marks for not being different enough cos then we wudnt have this happening.
So they gave the story of MGS collection a lower score then MW3? That makes perfect sense doesn't it? I don't know whether to laugh or cry.