I love Modern Warfare 3. Come at me, haters.
I've expressed my love of MW3 view many times, probably sometimes in a bit biased way. As the clear majority of you people (the internet in general) seem to show hatred or dislike towards MW3 (judging by comments such as "MW3 sucks ass" or "That title [worst CoD game] would belong to MW3"), I myself can't really see why.
Ever since MW3 came out, I have only seen so many bad things that it's acceptable, considering every game has a few flaws (an overpowered weapon/equipment, for example), these being something like Type 95 and rather poor maps. As the community started to go down with the game, I stood by my opinion that it's still one of my favorites (probably also influenced by my prior addiction to MW2), which isn't something I did with Black Ops (where I loved the game at first, but then gradually started hating it, which lead to me creating a page dedicated to it). I always like playing it, and it has given me some good times.
Now, some would say it sucks because it's "a copy-paste of other CoDs" or "MW2.5". Why is a game bad because it is similar to other games, particularly MW2? Admittedly, it is, but not as much as some say. The same HUD interface would probably give the feeling, considering this makes it visually similar, which is a big part of it. However, there are a lot of improvements (such as lag reduce and more successful host migrations et cetera) and new stuff (such as weapon proficiencies, lots of new weapons and some new perks, revamped killstreak system and completely new maps with only Terminal being old from the wide range of them). If I may, I'd say BO is very similar to MW2 as well, but barely anyone mentions this because the HUD looks a bit different. Back to my point, this to my knowledge doesn't mean a lot. It only may make you a bit angry if you bought the game yourself, but I've seen people complain that they've "wasted 60 bucks on the game" when their parents completely paid it. Yeah.
Assassin, MP7, ACR 6.8 and the whole nine yards. As I said, every game has flaws. CoD4 has M16A4 and Martyrdom. WaW has MP40. MW2 has UMP45/ACR and OMAbuse. BO has Famas/AUG/AK74u and Ghost. BF3 has USAS 12 FRAG and M16A3 (or had, really). While the aforementioned are only the casual FPS games, my point stands: every game has its flaws. Some developers take this to consideration and fix them, but not all of them. Before you go "but they could've patched MP7" or something along those lines, take note that they've tweaked several other weapons, something Treyarch half-did with BO by slightly nerfing Famas (but humorously, they failed to notice the identical AUG) and IW did with Model 1887 Akimbo (which was a complete overkill of a nerf). Assassin or MP7 or whatever your biggest such in-game problem is not such a gamebreaker anyway that it would make the whole game unplayable, also seeing as not everyone uses them (on a side note, OMAbuse was a gamebreaker, but fortunately 95% of the people have stopped using it).
While not a major point considering CoD is popular for its multiplayer, campaign is pretty good as well in my opinion. (Also see my review blog about this.) It may have been a little James Bond style (as Magma-Man would probably say), but at least it did what I wanted; kill Makarov. And in one of the most satisfying ways possible. It had its epic moments, including a certain soldier dying and you visiting whatever locations while seeing how WW3 would cripple such major cities as NYC, Paris, London or Berlin. Not the best campaign out there, but I still liked it.
I think I've covered enough to this point. Feel free to correct anything I said if needed, and please leave your input (what do you think of MW3 and why so?). But keep it clean. --MLGisNot4Me talk 14:18, October 31, 2012 (UTC)