Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

I am one of those people who is judging this based on the campaign alone. The online is good as always. The story modes in the MW series have always been interesting, and the backdrops are breathtaking. Some of the scenes with the the US Marines and Army are really cool, and the whole nuclear war, conspiracy theory thing is enough to make you think. While this campaign was a bit longer than MW2's, it still felt kinda short (I probably beat it in around 13 hours).It also isn't the great ending and climax that one may want. There are also the same old endless waves of enemies, who will completely disregard their own safety to try and kill you. But overall, its a great ride, and if they made it into a movie it would be amazing (as well as cost near a billion dollars)...

Quick summary: Modern Warfare 3 starts off with Captain Price and Nikolai getting Soap, whose still injured from the ending of Modern Warfare 2, to a safehouse in India. Meanwhile, NYC is under attack by the Russians and Makarov is still at large.

The campaign was awesome, just awesome. There was so much action in those levels, a few characters return, I loved some of the plot twists, and also fighting in France, Germany, on an airplane, etc. was cool. I will say that there were times where a few levels seem to have gone by really quick. The multiplayer was similar to the first 2 games, but this time it has new killstreaks and game modes. Also Spec Ops is pretty cool, just like in MW2.

Overall, MW3 is epic and whoever played the first 2 games or the Call of Duty series in general will love this game.

When Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 was released in 2011, it immediately divided players into two camps. Some began to scold the game for its predictability and "chewing over" past ideas, while others enjoyed the proven formula with cinematic explosions, machine-gun bursts and the pace of battles. I definitely ended up in the second camp. Yes, the MW3 did not invent anything very new, but it masterfully "rode on proven wheels."

The plot continues the events of "Modern Warfare 2" and picks up the story right from the moment where the last part ended. The world is on fire, World War III is breaking out, and the United States, Europe, Russia, and the Middle East find themselves at the epicenter of a global conflict. The location changes every 10 minutes: One minute we're fighting off Russian troops in New York, the next we're running through the streets of Paris, and then suddenly we're in London.

The main characters are already familiar faces: Captain Price, Yuri, Cope (what a stupid name) and, of course, the main villain is the treacherous Vladimir Makarov. At some point, the plot turns into a personal vendetta, and, as usual, we, driven by a thirst for revenge, go through blood and battles to get to the main villain. The story is full of epic moments. All this is served in a typical style for the "Call of Duty" series - a minimum of time to contemplate the world around, a maximum of explosions and unexpected turns.

The gameplay in MW3 is the same polished mechanics that have long made the series a hit. Hurricane shootouts, spectacular missions, escapes from collapsing buildings - all this works flawlessly.

Did I like the shooting system? Yes. The shooting is juicy, the weapon feels heavy and powerful, and each shot "reverberates in the hands" (and speakers) with a characteristic crunch of metal. The enemies are behaving quite aggressively, and the hero needs to fight for his life with all his might.

But, of course, we must not forget that this is a "Call of Duty", so we can forget about the tactical approach. There is no need to think through complex strategies here - the main thing is to recharge in time and not forget to hide behind shelters.

What are the locations? I would call this an adventure like a bullet-ridden trip around the world. One of the main advantages of the game is its variety of locations. New York, Paris, London, Berlin - you will be able to visit the hottest spots on the planet. The streets of megacities are blazing colorfully with the fire of war, destroyed buildings are crumbling like houses of cards.

I especially remember the scenes in London and Paris. The London mission, where you have to fight with all your might, cross the subway tunnels, looks like a scene from a Hollywood action movie. And in Paris, one of the most spectacular moments of the game takes place - the collapse of the Eiffel Tower. If after that someone says that "Modern Warfare 3" does not know how to surprise, then I do not know how to impress them.

Graphics in MW3 are the case when everything is done with high quality. Yes, the engine is slightly outdated, but the developers have made the most of it. The explosions are juicy, the surroundings are clear, and the lighting looks nice.

But the main thing is the staging. Everything here is built on entertainment: the cameras shake at the right moments, the characters dramatically fall, the enemies effectively "knock the doors off their feet," and the buildings collapse according to the laws of Hollywood. It's not just a shooter, it's an interactive action movie where the player is literally bombarded with epic scenes.

"Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3" is a classic example of a game that takes not novelty, but high-quality performance. Yes, the formula hasn't changed much from the previous parts, but I personally don't need it. When I launch Call of Duty, that's exactly what I want: drive, cinematic scenes, dynamic gameplay, and epic shootouts.

Of course, you can find fault with the fact that the game is following the beaten path and does not offer fundamental innovations. But why break something that works? Personally, I enjoyed MW3 - it's a strong, entertaining action movie that gives exactly what you expect from it.

8 out of 10.

MW3 is probably the weakest game in the trilogy, but is still a pretty good game. After the first two MW games. expectations for this game were through the roof and that was probably one of the reasons people overreacted a bit when it came out, admittedly this game isn't as strong as it's predecessors but is still a good game, the campaign is short and unfortunately it doesn't have as many memorable set pieces as the previous games, with only two of them being stand outs for me, the score is good but again not as good as the previous ones, gameplay is the standard stuff, not many changes from MW2, the story is actually better than MW2 in my opinion, with the stakes actually feeling pretty high and the game has a pretty satisfying conclusion. Even though MW3 was weaker than what came before, I would still recommend this game solely to see how this particular storyline is concluded.

Did you play CoD4: Modern Warfare? Great! Did you play CoD: Modern Warfare 2? Great! Because this is the same for better and worse. In keeping what must be exactly the same formula of the first two Modern Warfare installments in both campaign and multiplayer, Infinity Ward delivers nothing new with this installment; fortunately that formula is a pretty great one. Survival is the only thing I can think of that is new, it was a nice distraction but nothing huge. Spec Ops and multiplayer are still fun, but again, nothing new. The campaign is once again well directed and voiced, with a satisfying conclusion and a nice twist in playing as Yuri for a time. The problem is, as you've read before here, we've seen it before. All of the hallmarks of the CoD campaign gameplay returns without any new fun twist that makes it disappointing. Look, all in all it's a fun game. I enjoyed it. I have good memories with it. But was the beginning of my disinterest in CoD, especially because it was the beginning of Activision trusting the once legendary formula so much turning out bad Call of Duty games.