News Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Review

@Joe @Baz

I remembered positive coverage from here on MW2 and forgot the user votes, my bad. Apologies and thanks for the reply.

To everyone holding up BF3 as a paragon of multiplayer; I agree that it is good, but DICE need to playtest/support their games more. There are definite balance issues that you know will never get completely patched while they work on paid for DLC and then BF4. I wish they were owned by a company that valued polish rather than forcing the game out in front of CoD with bs Origin and Battlelog integration. Oh and while I'm at it, why are half the walls inexplicably invincible? Sure the destruction looks better, but there is less destruction than BC2. Overall, good game with room for improvement.

 

I bought this just to have something new to play until I upgrade my comp and buy BF3. I've played MW 1 & 2 and liked them both until bc2 came.

O boy, have I never been so dissapointed about a game in my whole life. From the start I've had this problem with the mous sensitivity changing ingame. It seems like it's a common problem and the whole game is unplayable until it's resolved.

Ofcourse it's not fair to judge the whole game because of my little bug. But the little I've experienced of the MP game so far have only bin an increase of the stuff I didn't like in MW2. And that was cramped maps full of sprinting and jumping players with machine pistols and knifes. Enemys spawning behind you and then there is always the one guy who pumps out killstreak after killstreak and has 40/3 in stats. And forget about sniping unless you'r a quickscoper. But if you like that then this is the game for you.

 

\o/

Imo BF3 and CoD are hardly any different. Both are far from being a tactical shooter and it's kinda sad that BF3 gets all the credit for that when Arma2 does everything bigger and better and was doing it years ago.

 

You sacrifice any journalistic integrity and also lose any objectivity instantaneously by opening and ending with on 'Meh' but each to their own. I enjoyed the game for what it is, my life is better because of that. I understand why people hate what COD represents, but I don't have the time or energy to waste my life complaining about a piece of code and an industry I cant change. Its still better than Angry Birds.

 

Good review. This is pretty much how I've felt about 98% of the first person games I've played since about 2005. Nice to finally have a reviewer just say it.

 

How much rep can you give a person on a single post? I hope it's over 9000 because that's what Joe deserves

 

thanks for a proper review of this, too many sites hit the 9/10 button without even seeming to even play the game.

agree completely, zipping around in the london underground on a jeep or dropping drone strikes on waves of enemies has never been as samey or boring - every single SP level has a parallel from the past 2 games that was almost exactly the same just with slightly different scenery. MP has more unlocks than you can shake a stick at now but it feels no different from mw1 otherwise - still tight maps with twitch gaming and spawning running around dying repeating.

glad i didn't get this on the pc, would have been money wasted without being able to trade it back (my intention from the start tbh, soon as BF3 PC drops in price)

 

Would have liked to see Joe review BF3 as well, it's great having these hard hitting reviews for games which are all too often scored higher than they should simply because the viewers expect it. On the flip side, it's great having those hard hitting points be valid rather than simply mindless criticism in order to seem edgy and raw.

Can we expect similar for Skyrim's review?

 

Best review ever! Very true indeed

 

amen to that, ive got a lonely 5850 and its all on high settings. runs superb and still makes my jaw drop sometimes. (ive even been gibbed when staring around and the graphics )

 

I love all these 'Best review ever!' comments. I wonder which FPS they play.

 

As I own a PS3 and Xbox I must be a "console kid". Only I'm not claiming "MW3 is teh best game eva" nor do I have any desire to play it. Like most people I know we're playing BF3. So keep your uninformed, pseudo-elitist PC playing ******** to yourself in the future.

Turns out you know **** all.

 

Nothing excites me less than another COD game. I'll admit I can't be bothered to read the review, but I was interested to see the rating.

M'eh

I think that sums it up

 

I assure you - reading the review is well worth it.

 

It's a bit like doh and d'oh!

Personally, I'm a doh kinda guy.

 

Greetings!

I made the mistake of going to the second page and seeing the 55% before actually reading the review. Dont see a point reading the review.
Hope Bit-tech gets enough page hits because of this.

 

The main problem with the COD series is here is Australia they want AUD$99 on steam for the game. I already have MW1, MW2 and BLOPS there is no way I could justifie that much money on more of the same.

If it was released as say a AUD$15-20 expansion or something then sure I could live with that.

AUD$99 is how much I expect to pay for AAA titles that bring something new and fresh, not rehashed s**t

 

good honest review, me likey.

 

An interesting thing to keep in mind which was discussed in some article or blog (I just can't seem to find it!) is what 55% actually means. Many of us immediately think of school when we see percentages and scores. A 55% in school is a failure, the worst possible letter grade. In a review, however, this isn't always the case, though many reviewers seem to take it that way for some reason.

All too often video game reviews get into the mindset that a game rated as a 7 or 6 is a failure. Only the most dire and disgusting games could get something as low as a 5 or less. So what, then, is the point of using a 10 point scale? Why not use a five point scale where 0 is equivalent to a 5 on a ten point scale? I believe Bit, or at least Joe, are aware of this and try to actually grade scores according to this with 0 as an absolute failure. Therefore a 55% for a video game isn't actually the end of the world, it's just likely not worth playing. Conversely, you should expect scores in the 90%+ range on only the best of games (and products). This is a little different compared to most other reviewers who hand out scores like 9/10 as if they were candy.

 

That is what i said. If MW2 and MW3 would be a SP and MP DLC for COD4:MW for up to 10-15e, why not. A 60e game ? They must be joking. Or know people are stupid and will buy it anyway.