SINGLEPLAYER


Though many reviewers are always ready to shower CoD games with praise, after the first game, I continue to be less impressed with each consecutive release. The first MW was incredible and changes the rules for linear singleplayer shooter storytelling as well as the rules for multiplayer leveling. The second game only improved upon the first with better graphics and better physics. But, the second game’s  storytelling suffered  from ridiculousness and felt like a retread.

 
Modern Warfare 3 has the exact same technical problems as Modern Warfare1 and 2.   Unlike games such as Crysis 2 where the enemies actually have to accurately shoot at you, the hardest mode of CoD:MW3 feels like a nightmare.  All enemy weapons are always able to damage you even if there is a scene where the enemy is not pointing directly at you. There are also problems with enemy spawn points.  In some situations enemies spawn right on top of your position and in others there are points where they spawn into the map illogically and do their best to make their way to your position even if there are other targets they should be more concerned with.  The artificial intelligence is dumb, but it has an eagle eye and can kill you with ease.


The singleplayer campaign can be completed in a mere 5 hours, but, that time is artificially elongated if you choose to take the difficulty up to the harder modes.

The designers tried to make this a non-stop rollercoaster ride of action sequences, but, I found it "been there, done that". 

 
The story centers around your hunt for international terrorist, Makarov,  who is your run-of-the-mill Ruskie terrorist  and was able to start a war between Russia and America by making the Russians think Americans shot up a Russian airport’s unarmed citizens.

 
The Russians invaded America and launch an offensive across Europe. You’ll spend the beginning of the game hopscotching from country to country  while shooting anything that makes your crosshairs red and tapping specific buttons at specific intervals to complete life-or-death quicktime events.   Though I can’t spoil the story for you here, all I can say is that it’s nowhere near as exciting as the original game’s story.  But Singleplayer isn’t the reason people are buying CoD: MW3 anyway.  MULTIPLAYER is…




MULTIPLAYER

 
CoD: MW1  rewrote the book on how  multiplayer games would award achievements and in-game rewards.   Weapons are unlocked by gaining experience points  and virtually everything the player does is tracked to ultimately gain personal achievements such as  sprinting long distances, falling long distances and surviving  or  killing enemies with specific weapons in specific ways.

 
Though the standard deathmatch and team deathmatch modes make their return, there are a few new features to keep you excited and replaying the game until the next CoD is released next year.


“Kill Confirmed” requires you to collect the dog tags of murdered players in order for the kills to count. This means that camping is nullified since snipers will have to actually move to collect their kill. I originally saw this in CRYSIS 2 as a standard gameplay element. 

  
“Team Defender” is similar to Halo 3’s “Oddball” where the team gains points for holding a flag for extended periods of time and protecting it.

 
In unranked games, modes from Cod: Black Opts like “one in the chamber” – where you only have one bullet and must kill players to get more bullets – makes a comeback.  There’s even a “King of the Hill” style mode called “Drop Zone”  where players must hold and dominate a command point until care packages arrive.

 
Using a weapon causes the weapon itself to level up – which unlocks perks for that specific weapon. Instead of simply being able to equip “steady aim” for the character, the weapon itself must be used until proficiency is built. This will allow you to steady your aim with that particular weapon.  It actually makes a lot of sense when you think about it since, in reality, you’d actually need to use a gun over and over before you got better with it and that experience wouldn’t carry over to another gun.   I also like the ability to equip more than one type of add-on. You can, for example, use a reflex sight and sniper scope on the same gun, but switch scopes depending on the situation.  Crysis games did this better though. Why should I have to choose between two attachments and "recoil reduction"?

 
The most important changes the to the formula this time around are major changes to the structure of the level up system.   The chaotic killsreak system from MW2 has been replaced by a more  balanced system that doesn’t lend itself as easily to abuse.   The streak bonuses are now “strike packages” tiered into: Assault, Support and Specialist.    “Assault” gives you direct attack bonuses such as a Predator drone. “Support” drops care packages in - such as: auto-machine gun turrets.  “Specialist” offers skilled players access to three  the game's perks if they can score 8 consecutive kills (by camping no doubt).  Fortunately, what you aren’t likely to get anymore are two players hiding and killing each other trying to unlock a “nuclear bomb” like in MW2.


I am simply not impressed by MW3's maps. All of them are confusing, unrealistically laid out, uninspired and circular. Worse yet, the spots you'd want to be able to get to on the maps are off limits - which makes the whole thing feel like shooting fish in a barrel. There's very little use for sniper rifles because your position is never secured and just about every battle happens at fewer than 50 feet.   MW1 had the best maps and MW2's were larger and more detailed. MW3's maps are small and messy. You can't move further than 30 feet without being shot in the back or side by someone who spawned virtually next to (or behind)  your position.  While MW kept me excited and engaged for hours, in MW3,  I typically play 2 or 3 rounds and then quit. 


The maps have no real objectives. It feels like you are fighting for no good reason. This is totally unlike the assault maps of older games such as Unreal Tournament or Battlefield 3 - where your team has a specific objectic to destroy and the game continues to expand from that point onwards.  The only game type that gave me something to fight over was "Kill Confirmed".   Fight for the dogtags. 



COD: ELITE


Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 may be shaping out to be the most expensive “expansion pack” ever created by the hands of man.  There is no reason this game couldn’t have been a less-than-$60 add on to MW,2, but, not only are you being asked to pony up $59.99 for this, you are also going to be solicited costly map packs within the next month or two.   This time around, to expand on that, there is now a subscription service called CoD: Elite which only the most hardcore of basement dwellers need to apply.  CoD: Elite  offers you early access to downloadable content, lets you “learn” more about each map including:  where you’ve been killed and by who, where the spawn points are,  comprehensive information about your kill to death ratio and accuracy.  For the more hardcore players,  you can use map information to plan strategies with your clanmates.  Elite offers real world competitions with real world prizes, but, comes at a steep price:  $49.99 annually for the whole enchilada – which is coincidentally what I pay annually to be on Xbox Live in the first place.



GRAPHICS AND SOUND

As I've stated before, the Xbox 360's (and PS3's) time is over. It simply doesn't have enough video memory or physical memory to put as much interactivity into newer games as they deserve.   CoD:MW3 does not look substantially different than MW2, but, while textures and color density hasn't improved, the locales modeled have.  The streets of Paris and the New York Stock Exchange look especially detailed - though, I'd rather give the graphical nod to Crysis 2 for the time being.   Even Battlefield 3 offers more eye candy with it's expanding battlefields  that  quadruple the size of maps.

Sound is roughly equal to what it was in MW2.  Multiple channel speaker amplifiers will be needed to get the most out of it. In stereo mode, there is far too much chaos going on to be fully reproduced. When hooked to my RCA 5.1, I was able to get full immersion into the environments, the bullet ricochets and the thunderous gunfire.



OVERALL

 
I got Battlefield 3 a few weeks ago and have played it very infrequently – opting for Mortal Kombat sessions. Battlefield 3 offers a wider, more involving multiplayer experience with exciting vehicle and teamwork elements, but, CoD:MW3 offers more multiplayer game modes and a more focused, coherent multiplayer experience.

  
I choose to give this game 4/5 stars because it feels like more of the same and doesn’t really expand on my expectations the way games like Crysis2 did.  CoD:MW3 is a must have for the fans, but,  I was hoping for more.

Recommended: Yes