5 reasons why Modern Warfare 3 has a Metacritic score of 2.3

It’s been two years since Modern Warfare 2 launched in November 2009. It was lauded by critics near and far for its “compelling story” and called “a masterpiece for careful iteration”. Why then has its successor fallen flat on its head in the eyes of gamers?

The story is too old to be commented.
iamnsuperman2467d ago

None. You missed the one reason. Metacritic user rating is done by users. A lot of thoses user either rate 0 or 10 without playing the game (do not ask me why but there are a lot of sad people in the world). The users of metacritic have shot themselves in the foot because their reviews are worthless because they have abused the system. Why is this even news worth I do not know.

cpayne932467d ago

These are the real reasons:

1. Trolls
2. Trolls
3. Trolls
4. Trolls
5. Trolls

I don't like cod but it does not deserve that low of a score.

brish2466d ago

Actually it was all my fault. ;-)

KonGreat2466d ago

BUT imo it doesnt deserve the high rating it got from most of the critics either (: It's a good game, but if you recycle most stuff from MW2 it should get a lower grade. Hence many other games get 'penalty' points if they would do the same.

neoandrew2466d ago

It deserves a whole 3, tops...

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2466d ago
Septic2467d ago

The real five reasons:


cpayne932467d ago

Only one minute too late bro.

MarioAna2467d ago

While i agree there are a lot of trolls out there, the fact is that BF3 would also get a lot of CoD trolls downvoting it, yet the PS3 version sits on 7.5 Metacritic User score, likewise Uncharted 3 would get lots of Xbox trolls but it's user score is 8.2 likewise Forza 4 would get a lot of Sony\GT5 trolls but it's user score is 8.

This is more than just trolls, i think people are really unhappy about the step sideways and not forward for the CoD series.

JoeReno2466d ago

Very logical. It makes perfect sense to me that the user reviews of the millions of copys the game sold would far out weigh the "haters" of MW. I have never cared for the games personally, but my user reviews are done with my dollars. I played MW1, and it never did much for me. Got black ops as a christmas gift, and still didn't do much for me so this was a given that I would pass on the 3rd MW. I'm not about to bother to leave a fake user review on the game, but I do wonder why the masses are so fond of this very very average FPS.

davekaos2466d ago

Mario i'm glad you put that because its true.

Seems most people just assume TROLL but if you actually go on metacritic the user review on all 3 platforms is into its thousands and the mass of them being low scored.

Like mario said if it were trolls then why is BF3 not the same score.

Simple answer is MW3 is a poor game compared to cod4. Devs are supposed to take steps forward not backwards

MysticStrummer2466d ago

Exactly what I was going to post. Those who cry "Troll" are in denial about MW1.75, when even good reviews will admit it's just more of the same. I think the number of people who are happy with more of the same is getting smaller with every release.

davekaos2466d ago

Exactly Mystic

The user base might be getting smaller but its still a massive fanbase. We have all these people paying these developers $60 to do nothing new.

I certainly don't agree with that and if others do agree then there is something wrong. Everyone wants bigger and better Acti just want more money.

If people don't start to realize this then the industry will follow and then we might as well just pack up gaming now because the direction cod is going in my honest opinion is appalling.

Almost all multilayer games use dedicated servers now in some form or another so why cant cod and all the money it makes. Also PC gamers dont even get real dedicated servers because the dedicated stuff is unranked and ranked is P2P.

Dlacy13g2466d ago

Sorry but have to disagree MarioAna, this is not something more. BF3 fanboys have been insanely rabbid as the war of words increased. Couple that with EA doing some mud slinging... I am sure BF fanboys were in high gear to troll the metacritic and pull it down. Hell given the way EA has acted through all this it would shock me if they were behind most of the bad user reviews.

MW3 is a very good game. Any score below a 7 is just someone either trolling or overly jaded.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2466d ago
krisq2466d ago

I think it perfectly shows that larger part of COD users are casual gamers which don't care about stuff like this.

FunkMcnasty2466d ago

I agree with krisq. I also think that's why it sold a billion copies already in its first week of release. The masses of sheeple love it, but to hardcore gamers like us, The Call of Duty Franchise has become that awesome indie band that we were all in love with when they released thier first few albums and nobody knew who they were but the true fans. Then that band had a hit song, and subsequently sold out and got away from making the music we found meaningful when we discovered them and began writing saccarine pop-anthems for dollars and image.

frostypants2466d ago (Edited 2466d ago )

The better question is why the "Critic" score is 88. Sorry, this is NOT an 80+ quality game. If any other developer released this, they'd bash it as an MW2 clone, yet when Sledgehammer does it, it's somehow OK. Unreal. They shamelessly took MW2 and just re-arranged a few things and added a couple of really cheap-looking perks (e.g. the strafing run...that must have taken all of 4 hours to code...just a copy-paste of the air strike with tweaks).

This is a 70/100 game. Not as good as the critics claim due to their political reasons (don't PO the publishers lest they quit sending early copies and holiday gift-baskets), and not as bad as the gamers due to theirs (fanboyism).

As is so often the case, the truth falls in the middle.

Caffo012466d ago (Edited 2466d ago )

70/100 at best...played it at a friend's house and it looks and play awful..if anything has changed from cod 4 is for the bad.. it was a great game in 2007! but 4 years later? i don't think so..

kparks2466d ago

Actually the game is that bad I rated it a 3 and gave a long discription why in short maps suck colors are bland and all grey game is way too frindly to new players and if u play anything objective based air support is constant there is always a chopper or stealth bomber flying over every 10 seconds.. every one i play with and I know personally say they same thing its garbage and has the worst maps they ever played... it does deserve a 3 or 4.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2466d ago
thaiboy2467d ago

If the game was outstanding surely it would have got a better review from the people that play it?

cpayne932467d ago

It isn't outstanding, but it isn't a 2.3 either. All those points you mentioned are true criticisms of the game, but it isn't that bad of a game. A lot of people just like to hate cod and they went to these user reviews to trash the game. I don't really like the game, but you can't really believe those review scores are people who actually bought the game. A lot of people I know who bought it really like it.

thaiboy2467d ago

I agree completely, the score there is very much out of line but that tends to be the nature of gamers who are disappointed, they loose all sensibility and react harshly.

frostypants2466d ago

It's not as bad as a 2.3, but it's also not as good as an 88.

Gam3rSinceBiRTH2466d ago

5 Reasons? ....

1. Trolls
2. Fanboys
3. Idiots
4. Losers
5. Buttheads.

That was easy.

MarioAna2466d ago

Most people fit into all of those categories.

news4geeks2466d ago

then even more reason to suggest those 5 as being correct.

lugia 40002466d ago

MW3 deserves no more than a 6.5

Show all comments (46)
The story is too old to be commented.