HeisenbergFX4
Member
Honestly people destroyed BF for ditching single player and only focus on MP (which they fucked up at launch anyhow) but maybe they were onto something
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
diffusionx
Gold Member
The ones they put effort into like BOCW and MW2019 are good.
Ryuji Goda
Member
I really like the campaign so far. This Makarov is much more menacing than the original one IMO.
Krieger
Member
4/10 by IGN:
www.ign.com
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Single-Player Campaign Review - IGN
Underbaked, rehashed, and cobbled together from multiplayer parts, Modern Warfare 3’s single-player campaign is everything a Call of Duty story mode shouldn’t be.
HeisenbergFX4
Member
From IGNs review4/10 by IGN:
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Single-Player Campaign Review - IGN
Underbaked, rehashed, and cobbled together from multiplayer parts, Modern Warfare 3’s single-player campaign is everything a Call of Duty story mode shouldn’t be.
Modern Warfare 3’s campaign commits the biggest sin possible for a globe-trotting action thriller: it's boring. What had the promise to be an intriguingly spun web of mystery instead ends up being a dusty cobweb you'd find at the back of your shed, clinging onto 15-year-old garden toys you once had fun with. It's a pale imitation of the past, made up of underbaked story moments that clash with attempts to introduce new open combat missions designed to encourage player freedom that instead fall flat on their face. Yes, the gunplay is still great and the graphics and sound design are top-tier, but I couldn't help but feel I was playing a shinier, less subtle version of something I've played too many times before. If this is the quality we've come to expect from Call of Duty campaigns, maybe it's for the best if a year or two is taken to reset and raise this low bar back to the heights of old.
From my detailed review yesterday
Finished it in about 3 1/2 hours, worst campaign I have ever played in the COD franchise and I spent $100 on this
4/10 and I think thats generous
TommyCronin6969
Member
Your thread has now become vindicatedFrom IGNs review
Modern Warfare 3’s campaign commits the biggest sin possible for a globe-trotting action thriller: it's boring. What had the promise to be an intriguingly spun web of mystery instead ends up being a dusty cobweb you'd find at the back of your shed, clinging onto 15-year-old garden toys you once had fun with. It's a pale imitation of the past, made up of underbaked story moments that clash with attempts to introduce new open combat missions designed to encourage player freedom that instead fall flat on their face. Yes, the gunplay is still great and the graphics and sound design are top-tier, but I couldn't help but feel I was playing a shinier, less subtle version of something I've played too many times before. If this is the quality we've come to expect from Call of Duty campaigns, maybe it's for the best if a year or two is taken to reset and raise this low bar back to the heights of old.
From my detailed review yesterday
Finished it in about 3 1/2 hours, worst campaign I have ever played in the COD franchise and I spent $100 on this
4/10 and I think thats generous
HeisenbergFX4
Member
Tarnpanzer
Member
Im 4h in and at ~66% playing on Veteran. Seems this playtime is only for easy mode?
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
Time to start the review thread.
IGN gave the campaign 4/10
IGN gave the campaign 4/10
ShadyAcshuns
Member
That's still too long. Games should be over in 30 minutes to an hour, tops.
PleazureDome
Member
4/10 by IGN:
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Single-Player Campaign Review - IGN
Underbaked, rehashed, and cobbled together from multiplayer parts, Modern Warfare 3’s single-player campaign is everything a Call of Duty story mode shouldn’t be.
I 100% agree with this score. I finished it in one sitting last night and am blown away by how bad it was. Did it have a few moments that were cool? I guess, but at least 90% of this is dogshit. MW (2019) and MW2 (2022) campaigns were pretty good and I cant believe this is even a follow up to those. I don't even care about the length if it had all killer missions wrapped in a 4 hour package. This was just a waste of everyone's time.
As a huge DMZ supporter you would think the "Open Combat Areas" would be right up my alley because they are mini DMZ missions minus the PVP. I hated these the most and should not be brought back into any future COD campaign. Do the developers really think I am going to replay these missions again to find more guns and plate carriers that I can only use for that one chapter/level?? This will be the only COD campaign I won't play twice.
LordCBH
Member
From IGNs review
Modern Warfare 3’s campaign commits the biggest sin possible for a globe-trotting action thriller: it's boring. What had the promise to be an intriguingly spun web of mystery instead ends up being a dusty cobweb you'd find at the back of your shed, clinging onto 15-year-old garden toys you once had fun with. It's a pale imitation of the past, made up of underbaked story moments that clash with attempts to introduce new open combat missions designed to encourage player freedom that instead fall flat on their face. Yes, the gunplay is still great and the graphics and sound design are top-tier, but I couldn't help but feel I was playing a shinier, less subtle version of something I've played too many times before. If this is the quality we've come to expect from Call of Duty campaigns, maybe it's for the best if a year or two is taken to reset and raise this low bar back to the heights of old.
From my detailed review yesterday
Finished it in about 3 1/2 hours, worst campaign I have ever played in the COD franchise and I spent $100 on this
4/10 and I think thats generous
Sledgehammer strikes again. Shit tier studio.
Operations66
Banned
Who plays Call of Duty for the campaign? It's all about the multiplayer. There are so many better single player games than CoD. I don't know why they even bother to include the campaigns, which usually suck.
Last edited:
Gudji
Member
1 point per hour seems fair.4/10 by IGN:
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Single-Player Campaign Review - IGN
Underbaked, rehashed, and cobbled together from multiplayer parts, Modern Warfare 3’s single-player campaign is everything a Call of Duty story mode shouldn’t be.
mitch1971
Member
So, 3 hour campaign with credit skip. 4 without. Gotchya.
HeisenbergFX4
Member
Thats not that far off as the credits start then stop and there is a cutscene then credits roll again for a very long time it seemed
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
You could have spent some of that money on Super Mario RPG for me . . . I wanna see if that game will get me into turn based, but I don't wanna spend the money to find out.
Now I'm mad for your $100. I even know a site selling it for $48!!!
splattered
Member
All eyes on next year's entry... Or maybe in a couple years depending on if they pump out another game next year or push release out a year? We shall see
BigLee74
Member
Yikes. Now on mission 3. Like mission 2, it’s another ‘open level obviously ripped from warzone’. They play ok, but it’s not what I want from a cod campaign. I hate the way the enemy always know where you are, even if you ran away unseen.
I hear they are making a MP playlist of ‘favourite MW2’ maps. Fuck me. As a buyer of MW2, what’s in it for me? Lazy as fuck. The seasonal additions had better be new maps!
I hear they are making a MP playlist of ‘favourite MW2’ maps. Fuck me. As a buyer of MW2, what’s in it for me? Lazy as fuck. The seasonal additions had better be new maps!
Lucifers Beard
Member
$48 for MWIII? Where did you see that? Despite thinking the campaign was absolutely miserable, I'd pay that just to play War mode in multiplayer.
Freelance Yakuza
Member
Perfect for Gamepass™4/10 by IGN:
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Single-Player Campaign Review - IGN
Underbaked, rehashed, and cobbled together from multiplayer parts, Modern Warfare 3’s single-player campaign is everything a Call of Duty story mode shouldn’t be.
Grildon Tundy
Member
The campaign has "cost savings" all over it.
Those linear levels and set pieces that have always been a COD selling point are expensive to make. They're traded in part for "Open Combat" missions that place AI around a map, maybe spawn more in during scripted segments, and call it a day. Easy peasy padding for a campaign that's about an hour long if you were to take them out.
One level that's not open combat reuses a small slice of a Warzone map. More savings there under the guise of fan service.
There have been maybe three moments that capture the cinematic feel of other campaigns, so I know Sledgehammer could've fleshed it out if they had more money and time.
Super disappointing after MW19 and MWII, which took chances by switching things up in ways that paid homage to other great games (Dishonored & The Last of Us) and didn't feel cheap.
Those linear levels and set pieces that have always been a COD selling point are expensive to make. They're traded in part for "Open Combat" missions that place AI around a map, maybe spawn more in during scripted segments, and call it a day. Easy peasy padding for a campaign that's about an hour long if you were to take them out.
One level that's not open combat reuses a small slice of a Warzone map. More savings there under the guise of fan service.
There have been maybe three moments that capture the cinematic feel of other campaigns, so I know Sledgehammer could've fleshed it out if they had more money and time.
Super disappointing after MW19 and MWII, which took chances by switching things up in ways that paid homage to other great games (Dishonored & The Last of Us) and didn't feel cheap.
Laieon
Member
My opinion on CoD is the same as it's been for a decade now. I'm more than okay with a short campaign, but I'd love an option to purchase it separately from the multiplayer. I'm not all that offended at a $30 price tag, because that's what I'd spend at a a cinema for a length-equivalent movie.
Pedro Motta
Member
COD peaked in 2019, all downhill from here. Good riddance.
March Climber
Member
Agreed 100% with this post. I've bought most CoD games on sale months after because I enjoy them for the bombastic popcorn-game experience that they are. If only Medal of Honor or Battlefield were still around so that each franchise would find ways to one-up each other in campaign set pieces.
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
I meant for super Mario rpg
Solarstrike
Gold Member
lem0n
Member
That's funny, she told me the same thing!
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
I'm not the bigges Cod fan but ive enjoyed most campaigns. Is it really so hard to believe this? You sound like you're secretly defending this crap by acting like nobody plays the campaigns. Funnily enough you say it's all about the multiplayer but is the multiplayer not ALSO the same, fairly basic FPS EVERY YEAR TOO?
There used to be some great campaigns. Even recently MW2019 was great, which is why this one is such a disappointment and shameless cashgrab. MW2 campaign was disappointing compared to 2019 but this new one sounds like pure disrespect. 3.5 hours? Even Cold Wars campaign was pretty good.
People like you are the reason why the campaigns are getting half assed. These devs hear your comments and are more liable to half ass things.
People loved Cod2, original modern warfare 1 and 2, Black Ops 1 and 2, MW 2019 etc. Plenty of people looked forward to a fun "blockbuster movie" type of game.
Operations66
Banned
CoD campaigns are linear and mostly mindless. If you enjoy them, good for you, I guess. But it’s obviously the multiplayer that made the series what it is. There are subtle differences in the multiplayer gameplay of the good CoDs. So they’re not all the same. But there are shitty CoDs, too, like the jet pack and wall-running ones.
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
I'm just saying don't act like these campaigns havn't been enjoyed by people. The multiplayer is basic too despite whatever subtle differences there are. It's fun yeah but same can be said about the campaign. It's the lack of any effort here that is the problem. There used to be worthwhile, 7-10 hour experiences. This game is pure disrespect and just shows what has become of this industry. Its pretty sad to see having been gaming for 30 years.
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
Buy a Nintendo voucher which will get you two Nintendo exclusives for $100. Get Mario Wonder or Zelda and Mario RPG
Grildon Tundy
Member
Just finished it. Very abrupt ending with no closure.
Here's hoping Zombies is fun.
Here's hoping Zombies is fun.
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
I was wondering what those vouchers were exactly. I guess we can’t count on gaming journalism to cover it . . . but I already got Mario wonder and Zelda.
Lucifers Beard
Member
The old ones are truly awesome fun and still hold up really well. My favourite of the bunch though is Infinite Warfare. I think the reason is that everyone dunked on it when it first released, so I had almost zero expectations. It happened to be fucking awesome and actually different in the way it was presented.
Outside of that, everything up until Black Ops 2 was good. After that, serviceable but not great.
Outside of that, everything up until Black Ops 2 was good. After that, serviceable but not great.
Zuzu
Member
Yeah I think it must be for recruit or regular difficulty. I played on hardened and died a lot and it took me longer than 4 hours I think - maybe 5 or 6 hours. It’s possibly the hardest COD I’ve played on the hardened difficulty. The enemies can be very accurate and pack a punch. I still think it’s a rubbish campaign though, despite it taking me a longer than the average play time.
Last edited:
HeisenbergFX4
Member
demigod
Member
Master Chief crossover
demigod
Member
The patience he has. I would’ve blown up after the 2nd Proceed.
BootsLoader
Banned
They will apologize and do the comeback/redemption thing all companies do nowadays.
Stare-Bear
Banned
Geez, Microsoft has owned them for less than a month and already it’s a shitshow… Took Rare a couple of years to reach that milestone 
Similar threads
- Poll