Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Review
- Thread starter Slycne
- Start date
Pretty much. Doesn't matter how good the game actually might be, tons of people who haven't played it will come in and say it's the worst game ever made.Tiscolfo said:
OT: Since I'm not interested in multi-player, I'll probably pick this up after a price drop. Having just finished Modern Warfare 2 a few days ago (I have a massive backlog of games to work through) I gotta say I'm interested to see how it ends and I love the way Modern Warfare does the single player because, love it or hate it, it is pretty much like a big old action movie.
I expected as much - I'm a little put-off by the '4.5 star' ranking, though. That seems a tad generous given the fact that this seems like little more than a rehash of the previous two MW titles.
the images and gameplayed he showed really contrasted from what he said, it honestly looked lackluster and didnt seem like much was new, just sort of re-skinned.
No one's gonna be happy about the reviews. The screaming hardcores will start throwing around GOTY and BEST EVAH! While the head-shaking haters are gonna claim uninspired drivel.
I have no plan on buying the game any time soon. Not as a commentary on its perceived quality or lack thereof, but rather because paying $60 for a game at this point in my life can't be rationalized.
I have no plan on buying the game any time soon. Not as a commentary on its perceived quality or lack thereof, but rather because paying $60 for a game at this point in my life can't be rationalized.
And so it begins. *Sets up a chair*
This should be a gooooooooooooood spectacle.
OT: Good review, although I only read the written review. I don't watch the video reviews. I'm a stickler for written reviews.
This should be a gooooooooooooood spectacle.
OT: Good review, although I only read the written review. I don't watch the video reviews. I'm a stickler for written reviews.
The review felt forced--as if the reviewer was forced to be diplomatic by the editor. "The game has enough new features to seem fresh" as opposed to, let's say "staying fresh"? Maybe I'm reading too much into it, I don't know. Was an uncomfortable review to watch.
The 5 hour estimated single player time is generous on its own. I beat the game on Veteran in a little over 7 hours on my first go through the game and I honestly was rather upset at how weak the entire game was. I always enjoyed the Call of Duty series single player for its difficult Veteran mode, but the last couple games have become far too easy in my opinion.
The 4.5 you gave is undermined by your caveat of "if you're not fatigued by the series". A 4.5 should be something that anyone who likes shooters should probably buy. The text itself though, is fine.
Or maybe you got bettermaddawg IAJI said:
I know I died a lot on the normal difficulty > . >Personally, I enjoyed the single player and felt annoyed that many reviewers just ignore this portion of the game to spend the entire review talking about how the multiplayer is the same or how the graphics are not pushing your PC to limit or even failing to run smoothly which is damn important in a multiplayer for people less fortunate to have a killer rig. So yes, I love IW and MW3 for using an 'older' engine, but damn, the game is pretty, from the submarine hunting mission to the sandstorm one, I didn't turn my eyes away from the screen a single moment.
I love BF, but BF3 is just not in my alley thanks to the QTE-heavy single player. But then again, CoD does suffer from a similar problem with way too many cutscenes that take control away from the player or turret sections which i despise though the ones in MW3 were definitely fun as hell like controlling the ground drone to unleash a hail on bullets on Makarov's bros.
Don't even get me started with how I hate Zombies and always wanted a survival mode that feels closer to MW than a Zombie game. Hurray for a real Survival mode!
Wait... so if the singleplayer letting you down is why you dislike BF3 then what BF games did you actually like? Because while BC/BC2 were alright (I stress alright), almost every other BF game didn't have a single player campaign at all.cainx10a said:
----------
Anyways, fairly standard review. Conforms with what I expected and all that and at least Justin didn't do the whole thing pretending to be Soap or Price or something
One thing though, it took more than a week to get the Battlefield 3 review out but very little time to do this one. Furthermore both were reviewed by Justin Clouse so it's not like there'd be too many methodological reasons for the time gap.
So either
1) MW3 has very little new content to be explored for the review relative to BF3
2) The Escapist put more of its resources (i.e. Justin Clouse man-hours) into getting out the review for the big popular FPS title as opposed to its underdog competitor.
3) I'm reading too much into this.
Edit* Also there's more people whining about the "incoming shit storm" than there have been people flaming. <3 internet.
I've never played Modern Warfare, but that Kill Confirmed game sounds fun. I have to say, if there was so much a push for multiplayer from most of the game's players, there probably would be more effort put into the single-player. Activision is betting that not making the extra effort is worth it.
Sucks to be in the minority.
Sucks to be in the minority.
No, trust me, I still died plenty, but I've rarely been able to beat one of the CoD games on Veteran as quickly as this. Even Black Ops took me around a week to beat. I remember having to take a few months hiatus from my Cod 3 Veteran run, simply because it got the better of me. I still remember when I finally did beat that game, I felt so fucking happy and accomplished.cainx10a said:Or maybe you got bettermaddawg IAJI said:
Besides, even if I did get better, I still shouldn't be capable of beating the game that quickly on my first play through, on the hardest difficulty. I didn't feel like I did something challenging when it was all done, I just looked at the clock on my xbox and literally said, 'I still got 6 hours until Skyrim comes out'
Ive gotta say the review was well written, but my opinions just dont match up. (To put it out there, im a fan of IW's MW and MW2.)
I honestly believe the Single Player was extremly anti-climatic. A few firefights I liked, but it seemed to be 'Checkpoint... infinite spawn enemies... Checkpoint..." It also seemed like they took every awesome mission from 1 and 2 and tried to reform their new game around it. No creativity really. And the end... oh gosh, im still not happy about the last mission. Horrible ending to a great story. The one good thing I have to say about the story was that it was written well... just alot of fluff in it, and not delivered well.
The multiplayer now... erm... Ill make it short. Horrible spawns, no real tactics, no real sniping, alot of unorganized chaos, always feels cramped, custom classes are chaos, and it inherited the 'get killed around walls' problem from black ops.. Pro's - Pretty good looking maps, love the new game types... erm.. cant think of anymore ATM, but there are some.
So... Yeah... I feel like it was a bad end to the MW series, though it tried to bring some innovation.
I honestly believe the Single Player was extremly anti-climatic. A few firefights I liked, but it seemed to be 'Checkpoint... infinite spawn enemies... Checkpoint..." It also seemed like they took every awesome mission from 1 and 2 and tried to reform their new game around it. No creativity really. And the end... oh gosh, im still not happy about the last mission. Horrible ending to a great story. The one good thing I have to say about the story was that it was written well... just alot of fluff in it, and not delivered well.
The multiplayer now... erm... Ill make it short. Horrible spawns, no real tactics, no real sniping, alot of unorganized chaos, always feels cramped, custom classes are chaos, and it inherited the 'get killed around walls' problem from black ops.. Pro's - Pretty good looking maps, love the new game types... erm.. cant think of anymore ATM, but there are some.
So... Yeah... I feel like it was a bad end to the MW series, though it tried to bring some innovation.
Let's see, I played all BF games in multiplayer for quite some time except the console ones like Modern Combat and loved them all. But single player is an important component of the entire package for me now since I don't play online that much. That's why I chose MW3 over BF3, because of extended single player components like Spec Ops. And they never released that co-op part of BF:BC2 for PC too, which was a bit of a disappointment for me, onslaught I believe it was called.Alexnader said:
I see. Oh well, enjoy Skyrim and kill a few of the cat people for me. Damn Khajits.maddawg IAJI said:No, trust me, I still died plenty, but I've rarely been able to beat one of the CoD games on Veteran as quickly as this. Even Black Ops took me around a week to beat. I remember having to take a few months hiatus from my Cod 3 Veteran run, simply because it got the better of me. I still remember when I finally did beat that game, I felt so fucking happy and accomplished.cainx10a said:Or maybe you got bettermaddawg IAJI said:
Besides, even if I did get better, I still shouldn't be capable of beating the game that quickly on my first play through, on the hardest difficulty. I didn't feel like I did something challenging when it was all done, I just looked at the clock on my xbox and literally said, 'I still got 6 hours until Skyrim comes out'
I would, but I've only seen one so far and he tried to assassinate me :<cainx10a said:Let's see, I played all BF games in multiplayer for quite some time except the console ones like Modern Combat and loved them all. But single player is an important component of the entire package for me now since I don't play online that much. That's why I chose MW3 over BF3, because of extended single player components like Spec Ops. And they never released that co-op part of BF:BC2 for PC too, which was a bit of a disappointment for me, onslaught I believe it was called.Alexnader said:
I see. Oh well, enjoy Skyrim and kill a few of the cat people for me. Damn Khajits.maddawg IAJI said:No, trust me, I still died plenty, but I've rarely been able to beat one of the CoD games on Veteran as quickly as this. Even Black Ops took me around a week to beat. I remember having to take a few months hiatus from my Cod 3 Veteran run, simply because it got the better of me. I still remember when I finally did beat that game, I felt so fucking happy and accomplished.cainx10a said:Or maybe you got bettermaddawg IAJI said:
Besides, even if I did get better, I still shouldn't be capable of beating the game that quickly on my first play through, on the hardest difficulty. I didn't feel like I did something challenging when it was all done, I just looked at the clock on my xbox and literally said, 'I still got 6 hours until Skyrim comes out'
I have to say, after being an snobby jackass with nothing but Minecraft and Dark Souls and indie games for months, it felt great to sit back and enjoy some spectacle for a change. I think it's safe to say that MW3's single player trounces BF3's, for what that's worth, and the survival and spec ops missions add a lot of life to it.
And multiplayer? Well, I think the truth is that BF3 and MW3 are different enough in philosophy that trying to compare the two is just a waste of time.
So yeah, Modern Warfare 3 is a great game.
And multiplayer? Well, I think the truth is that BF3 and MW3 are different enough in philosophy that trying to compare the two is just a waste of time.
So yeah, Modern Warfare 3 is a great game.
See, BF3 was really hilarious. While the MP is excellent, all the SP did was remind me how awesome CoD4:MW1 was.cainx10a said:
Sneaky sniper level where you follow your buddy stealthily but end up in a massive firefight anyway? Being executed in front of a camera by some Arab dude? Never seen that before.
OT: The review seemed, as someone already pointed out, rather diplomatic.