Remember that feeling when, after two years of playing Modern Warfare you just came home with Modern Warfare 2 and were like ?woah brah? this changes everything!?? Now imagine that scenario, except its after two years of playing Modern Warfare 2 and you just come home with Modern Warfare 2 again. And in a nutshell that?s essentially what we have here in Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer?s newModern Warfare 3, the climactic final installment in the most lucrative Call of Duty franchise in history. I can tell right now that this review is not going to sit well with some fanboys who will do doubt decry my inevitably (slightly) lower score because ?ZOMFG dis game iz teh rockzors n u r teh suckrorz n00b!!!1!!1?, so I am going to preemptively and politely invite those little fuck-tards to ?STFU? by saying that Modern Warfare 3is good. It?s a better than good game. I have enjoyed playing it so far and I?m fairly positive I?m going to be playing the multiplayer until Ragnarok. But you know why that?s not good enough? Because this is Infinity Ward we?re talking about here people, Infinity-freaking-Ward. Modern Warfare was great. Modern Warfare 2 was great. Good doesn?t cut the mustard with a studio like this, or at very least it shouldn?t. Let us begin ze dissection, ja?
The campaign? well it?s a competent, if somewhat improbable story, it makes for a thrilling and satisfying conclusion to the ever-escalating global conflict engulfing the world, and its got a ton of interesting set pieces to break up the monotony of shooting a million-bajillion Russians in the face. I was actually really pleased with the diversity aspect of it, and again they created a nice balance between the run-and-gun-through-the-wartorn-streets-while-the-tattered-American-flag-mournfully-waves-overhead-hoo-rah and the cigar-smoking-grizzled-British-operatives-scuttling-like-rats-through-a-hedge-while-trying-not-to-alert-every-Russian-in-Moscow-of-their-presence game play. But let me ask you if these set pieces sound familiar: piloting an AC130 to provide cover for your ground troops, chasing after a fleeing VIP through a disenfranchised Third World slum while shooting hordes of poorly-trained local gunmen and/or the main baddie?s elite soldiers? look, its not that these weren?t fun, its just that we?ve done most of them already for two games. It might seem like I?m being overtly harsh here, and I?ll fully admit that maybe I am, but with a campaign that I beat on the hardest difficulty in 5 hours 22 minutes and 13 seconds I just would have liked more. Its like listening to a really good song from your youth that only lasts two minutes: you still enjoy the experience as much as you did years before, but its over too quickly and its still the bloody song? except you just paid $65 to hear it again.
Now we?re getting into multiplayer. They?ve made some interesting additions to it, like a system that lets you further customize your gun by leveling it up, added ?Strike Packages? of killstreaks to focus the class system, and of course a whole host of new attachments, guns, equipment, and perks to destroy your hapless enemies with. They?ve made a few choices retroactive design-wise that I don?t necessarily agree with, like removing the ability to do a running dive into cover, removing the pay-for-guns system of Black Ops in favor of the traditional leveling system, or making the shotgun its own class again (ergo making it utterly useless as an option yet again), but everyone is going to have their own say on that. Its essentially the same system pioneered in Modern Warfare with a host of new bells and whistles and when you come right down to it it?s a formula that works so I can?t gripe too much. I anticipate that I?ll sink as much time into it as I did into Modern Warfare 2 (approximately 200 hours) so in the end the game will have the last laugh, I?m sure. As they say, ?he who laughs last, laughs last.?
Modern Warfare 3 is a competent effort from an extremely talented studio. The campaign is short but well done despite some repeating set pieces, the multiplayer builds on the successful core and adds enough to make it seem new even if it does resurrect some older game play elements from previous games. The production values show a great attention to detail synonymous with the series, however its obvious that the graphics engine is not aging well against its competitors, namely Battlefield 3. And that actually helps me transition into my final fanboy-enraging topic, the future of Call of Duty in relation to its competitors. Call of Duty, and the Modern Warfare series specifically, has reached somewhat of an ending point here. I?m reminded of the experience I had while playing Halo: Reach back in 2010, where I felt like I was in a video game time warp, transported back in time to an age before Call of Duty took over the FPS market. The game was still well put together but it felt stale and dated in comparison to our modern champions, and although Call of Duty isn?t there yet with games like Battlefield 3 innovating with vehicle combat and destructible environments its only a matter of time until the current giant falls unless it adapts. And unfortunately, old dogs (especially if they've created enormously successful video game franchises) are rarely inclined to learn new tricks.
Relentless Rating Richter Scale ? 4.4
5 ? When they report me missing because no one has seen me in a few weeks it will be because of this game.
4 ? Enjoyable game. Its not going to create a gaming addiction that destroys your family but you will still be immersed.
3 ? Might be worth renting from Blockbuster if those stores existed anymore. If you?re a fan of the series check it out.
2 ? If someone gives you this game for Christmas you will end up using it as a coaster until soul-crushing boredom forces you to play it.
1 ? This game makes Atari?s ET look like Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. ?Nuff said.
See this and more on www.relentlessreview.com
The campaign? well it?s a competent, if somewhat improbable story, it makes for a thrilling and satisfying conclusion to the ever-escalating global conflict engulfing the world, and its got a ton of interesting set pieces to break up the monotony of shooting a million-bajillion Russians in the face. I was actually really pleased with the diversity aspect of it, and again they created a nice balance between the run-and-gun-through-the-wartorn-streets-while-the-tattered-American-flag-mournfully-waves-overhead-hoo-rah and the cigar-smoking-grizzled-British-operatives-scuttling-like-rats-through-a-hedge-while-trying-not-to-alert-every-Russian-in-Moscow-of-their-presence game play. But let me ask you if these set pieces sound familiar: piloting an AC130 to provide cover for your ground troops, chasing after a fleeing VIP through a disenfranchised Third World slum while shooting hordes of poorly-trained local gunmen and/or the main baddie?s elite soldiers? look, its not that these weren?t fun, its just that we?ve done most of them already for two games. It might seem like I?m being overtly harsh here, and I?ll fully admit that maybe I am, but with a campaign that I beat on the hardest difficulty in 5 hours 22 minutes and 13 seconds I just would have liked more. Its like listening to a really good song from your youth that only lasts two minutes: you still enjoy the experience as much as you did years before, but its over too quickly and its still the bloody song? except you just paid $65 to hear it again.
Now we?re getting into multiplayer. They?ve made some interesting additions to it, like a system that lets you further customize your gun by leveling it up, added ?Strike Packages? of killstreaks to focus the class system, and of course a whole host of new attachments, guns, equipment, and perks to destroy your hapless enemies with. They?ve made a few choices retroactive design-wise that I don?t necessarily agree with, like removing the ability to do a running dive into cover, removing the pay-for-guns system of Black Ops in favor of the traditional leveling system, or making the shotgun its own class again (ergo making it utterly useless as an option yet again), but everyone is going to have their own say on that. Its essentially the same system pioneered in Modern Warfare with a host of new bells and whistles and when you come right down to it it?s a formula that works so I can?t gripe too much. I anticipate that I?ll sink as much time into it as I did into Modern Warfare 2 (approximately 200 hours) so in the end the game will have the last laugh, I?m sure. As they say, ?he who laughs last, laughs last.?
Modern Warfare 3 is a competent effort from an extremely talented studio. The campaign is short but well done despite some repeating set pieces, the multiplayer builds on the successful core and adds enough to make it seem new even if it does resurrect some older game play elements from previous games. The production values show a great attention to detail synonymous with the series, however its obvious that the graphics engine is not aging well against its competitors, namely Battlefield 3. And that actually helps me transition into my final fanboy-enraging topic, the future of Call of Duty in relation to its competitors. Call of Duty, and the Modern Warfare series specifically, has reached somewhat of an ending point here. I?m reminded of the experience I had while playing Halo: Reach back in 2010, where I felt like I was in a video game time warp, transported back in time to an age before Call of Duty took over the FPS market. The game was still well put together but it felt stale and dated in comparison to our modern champions, and although Call of Duty isn?t there yet with games like Battlefield 3 innovating with vehicle combat and destructible environments its only a matter of time until the current giant falls unless it adapts. And unfortunately, old dogs (especially if they've created enormously successful video game franchises) are rarely inclined to learn new tricks.
Relentless Rating Richter Scale ? 4.4
5 ? When they report me missing because no one has seen me in a few weeks it will be because of this game.
4 ? Enjoyable game. Its not going to create a gaming addiction that destroys your family but you will still be immersed.
3 ? Might be worth renting from Blockbuster if those stores existed anymore. If you?re a fan of the series check it out.
2 ? If someone gives you this game for Christmas you will end up using it as a coaster until soul-crushing boredom forces you to play it.
1 ? This game makes Atari?s ET look like Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. ?Nuff said.
See this and more on www.relentlessreview.com