Sergeant Bjurvén returns to assess Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. The question is, does it deliver a significant advancement to the series, or is the Call of Duty campaign experiencing a critical failure?
This installment features the return of Captain Price, Ghost, Soap, Farah, and other familiar faces as they pursue Makarov, who has been freed from his Gulag prison by the Konni Group’s mercenaries. The opening mission showcases impressive graphical fidelity in both cinematic sequences and gameplay, initially suggesting a potential high point for the series. However, this promise quickly diminishes, with subsequent missions exhibiting a noticeable decline in graphical quality, reverting to the level of MW2.
A primary concern is the reliance on established nostalgic elements. The game presents familiar characters and a similar narrative structure, with a slight expansion into a more open-world environment. Long-time Call Of Duty players, those who have followed the series since its inception in 2003, may find this approach repetitive. A more innovative direction for the franchise would be welcome. As previously noted in my review of Assassin’s Creed: Mirage, a successful execution of nostalgia involves creating a new experience that evokes the feeling of earlier titles while simultaneously evolving the gameplay. This is an area where Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 falls short.
The core gameplay experience feels dated. The voice acting lacks conviction and enthusiasm, and the campaign’s structure bears a strong resemblance to the DMZ mode. While the DMZ mode from MW2 offers player agency and freedom, the “Open Missions” in MW3, while similar in concept, still impose limitations on player control. The established characters remain consistent with previous iterations; however, the introduction of new weapons provides a minor positive addition.
A significant concern is the game’s release as a full-priced title. Initially conceived as DLC for MW2, which would have been a more appropriate offering given its short 3-4 hour playtime and overall quality, the decision to market it as a standalone game raises questions. The game is available in two editions: the Crossgen Bundle and the Vault Edition. The Vault Edition offers minimal additional value compared to the Crossgen Bundle. This situation is regrettable, and while Sledge Hammer Games developed the game, the ultimate responsibility rests with Activision, who pivoted from a DLC model to a full release, affording Sledge Hammer Games limited time to adequately refine the product to justify its price point.
In conclusion, the release of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 in its current state may prove detrimental to Activision in the long term. The lack of innovation and the incomplete nature of the game could lead to player attrition. Furthermore, the delayed availability of the Multiplayer and Zombie modes for early access purchasers may result in demands for compensation. The game feels like a compilation of elements from previous entries, albeit with a slightly more open structure. The initial anticipation surrounding this release has unfortunately culminated in a significant disappointment within the first-person action genre.
Turning to the Multiplayer mode, it offers limited innovation. While some new maps are present, alongside the return of maps from the original MW3, the changes are incremental. A new “War Mode” provides some entertainment, but it lacks originality. The objective of advancing, engaging enemies, and preventing the launch of nuclear weapons follows a well-trodden path established by numerous other war games, distinguished primarily by its enhanced graphics.
After approximately 10 hours of multiplayer gameplay, the prevalence of cheating became a significant issue. The anti-cheat software proved ineffective, with kill cams frequently revealing players using wallhacks to track movements and aimbots to rapidly target opponents. Additionally, some players appeared to be employing damage reduction cheats, mitigating incoming damage.
The Ground War and Invasion multiplayer modes, which were previously enjoyable in MW2, suffer from significant lag, rendering them unplayable. While anticipated patches may address these issues, their current state is severely compromised.
The return of Zombies, also known as MWZ, marks its first appearance since Cold War. This mode, built on the DMZ platform, initially held promise. However, the anticipated PVP (player versus player) element is absent. The game map features varying difficulty levels depending on proximity to the center, but players are restricted from engaging in combat with each other, removing a key aspect of DMZ. Furthermore, the NPCs, zombie sound effects and animations, mission structure, and available perks are largely recycled from Cold War.
One remaining aspect of the Vault Edition warrants attention: the inclusion of twenty tier skips for the Battle Pass. These skips, intended to accelerate progress, are pre-programmed to specific locations within the pass, rather than providing players with tokens to unlock desired items. This discrepancy between the advertised benefit and the actual implementation raises concerns about consumer satisfaction and potential recourse.
While initially attributing the shortcomings of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 primarily to Activision, further information necessitates a revision. Sledgehammer Games has publicly expressed pride in the game and affirmed that they were provided with ample time for development. However, given the game’s execution, this statement is concerning. Despite having the opportunity to create a compelling experience, the development team opted to perpetuate an outdated narrative. The iconic characters, including Ghost, Captain Price, Soap, and Makarov, deserve a more substantial and innovative portrayal.
Could this be the beginning of the end for Call of Duty? There is a concern that it might be.
Activision provided a review code for this assessment. The provision of materials does not influence editorial independence.
