You didn't think it was possible for CoD games to change even less? Well Infinity Ward is here to prove you wrong!
I'm going to keep this review very brief because by now, you all probably know what you're going to find in a Call of Duty game. However, I felt the need to write this review to send a warning to those looking to buy the game. Even more so than in the previous entries in the series, Modern Warfare 3 doesn't add much new content to the game, so a majority of what you're going to play will feel very familiar.
What you may not have expected is the degree that everything manages to stay the same. Simply put, what new things that have been added to the multiplayer are greatly overshadowed by what they took away. Yes, I get that Black Ops was made by Treyarch and not Infinity Ward, but no matter how flawed it might have been, the addition of CoD Points and the level of weapon/class customization was pretty robust and was something to be admired, and gave you a few more things to pull you back in. Let's just say that MW3's options are far slimmer and lack the CoD Points and Wager matches that made Black Ops more interesting. In it's place is weapon leveling, class roles (assault, specialist, and support), and... not much else honestly. If you've extensively played any of the other post-CoD 4 games, you'll know exactly what you're getting, with almost no surprises.
The only thing worth noting about competitive multiplayer is that the "Support" class role is FAR above the other two class types. The killstreak rewards are the best, and your killstreak doesn't end upon death. It may not be quite as noticable in Team Deathmatch, but fire up an objective game mode where the games tend to be more drawn out, and its true colors will be revealed. Who can't pull off getting at least 18 kills in a Domination game regardless of deaths (That's right, someone with 18 kills and 40 deaths can get a Juggernaut)? IW tries to balance this by making some of the offensive perks take less kills in the assault class, but would you rather have to get 15 kills without dying, or 18 kills with deaths allowed in between? That's what I thought. Killstreaks used to be about skill, or at least being able to competently string kills together. Now that anyone can get the best stuff in the game, what little skill it took to play a Call of Duty game has dropped even more.
But what I find most sickening of all is just how little the rest of the package has changed. Upon firing up the game, you're greeted with the exact same main menu screen as in MW2. Entering the multiplayer lobby, you'll also find the EXACT same menus, the same starting classes from MW2, maps that all look like they were heavily inspired by previous entries in the series (there's a carbon copy of Crash from MW1, as well as a map that looks scarily similar to Quarry from MW2), and the same, freaking graphics engine left completely identical and unchanged from the original Modern Warfare, and barely looks better than Call of Duty 2. I legitimately find it sickening that people are going out to pay $60 for this game when it is a scarily similar package to what you got 2 years ago. NOT just last years Black Ops, but Modern Warfare 2, which released 2 years ago.
With Modern Warfare 3, it's now official: Call of Duty is going down the road that Guitar Hero went a couple years ago, and that Dynasty Warriors has been treading for years now. It'll probably take much longer for people to stop buying these games, but you can depend on Activision to milk it for all its worth. Black Ops was an encouraging step forward, however small, but Modern Warfare 3 is a step back for the series into the same old ways. While other shooter games are continuing to move to bigger and brighter horizons, Call of Duty is content to stay where it is, and as such, it feels like nothing more than a game stuck in the past. Nothing here will dazzle you, nothing here will jump out at you as being fresh or noteworthy, and it's genuinely sad, because just 4 years ago this game was at the forefront of revolutionary FPS gaming. How the mighty have fallen.
Side note: It's important to remember that my 6.5 isn't technically reflective of the quality of the game. From a technical perspective this game, on its own merits, is better than "Okay". In other words, if you've never played a Call of Duty game before, there's a lot to make this package attractive. There's an action movie styled campaign, Spec Ops is always good fun, and the multiplayer package is large enough with plenty of ranks to go through, things to unlock, and plenty to keep you coming back. There aren't any real glaring problems (other than an outdated graphics engine) here, and everything is skillfully produced.
This 6.5 is because, as someone who has played each Call of Duty game extensively to date, it's discouraging that so little has been done with such a big license. Activision has the ability to fund a project with an improved graphics engine, and the developers aren't creatively dead. Remember, they brought us plenty of immersive games in the past. It's just a shame that, given the license and all of the talent behind the game, that the developers haven't put any effort into bringing some totally new elements into the series and would rather play it safe with doing what they know best. As Guitar Hero has shown, it can only work for so long before people get annoyed and want more. Hopefully we can look forward to a new entry that brings Call of Duty back to the big leagues again, and when that day comes I'll be first in line.
The Good:
+That same old Call of Duty action
+Everything is technically competent with no glaring issues or flaws
The Bad:
-That same old Call of Duty action
-The same graphics engine the series has been running on since CoD 2 still looks outdated
-Minimal changes from Modern Warfare 2