Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Well it's Black Ops 2 launch day, but I got Hardened Edition ordered from Amazon.com with free shipping so it's going to be a while till I get my copy. In the mean time, I was looking back at my Modern Warfare 3 review from back when the game was new and felt like I should do a redo with my current feelings towards the game instead of the feeling I had a month after release.
So, let's see how it holds up a year later.
Bleck. This was dissapointing when I first played it and is only more and more dissapointing as time goes on. Modern Warfare 2's campaign was incredible. The story was great, there were so many great, fun, and memorable moments, it's a campaign I'd want to play again and again. This campaign, I haven't bothered with a full second playthrough in all of this time. The story just isn't as well put together, it feels like no where near as much thought was put into it. We got a neat revelation with Yuri near the end and the opening levels in New York were fun but other then that I can't really recall any moments of the campaign where I was enjoying the story. It was advertised as WW3, but instead we just got Price, Soap, and Yuri going through boring places such as africa or wherever they went and an American Delta Force group that just went Rambo on the Russians and just about single-handedly handled the whole war. No attention is payed to the German military, or the British. It's all Americans. I myself am an American, but that doesn't mean I just want to see us doing all the good stuff. I like the Germans. I like the British. Kind of eh towards the French but I don't mind them either. Where were they all?
Overall this campaign was the weakest of the Modern Warfare campaigns. It's plot wasn't good, there weren't many fun moments, there weren't many memorable moments, I've had no urge to replay in a year, this campaign failed.
This is where the good stuff is. Now the community just about over-whealmingly bashes this game's multiplayer, complaining about this weapon being over-powered, that weapon being over-powered, the maps being boring, it being too much like MW2, etc. Well, I agree that the base game maps are boring, but I don't agree with anything else. I said it was the most balanced Call of Duty to date back in the first month of release and I still hold my ground in this position. If the MP7 is as over-powered as it is, why are the K/D of me and others I've compared to all just a tad bit over the other SMGs. Yes, admittedly it was over the other SMGs, making it more effective, but only by about 0.1. I also never have had problems with it really. In Black Ops, I was once playing Barebones and my team was destroying the other team. Then half-way through they switched to Famases, (some golden) and suddenly my team was going on death streaks. Alot of them. In fact we lost. I've never had an experience like that with anything MW3 has to offer and people I think are over-reacting. The weapon leveling is the best part of the multiplayer. I love it. It is so satisfying to level up weapons. So much so that despite being at level 80 for a long time now I never have prestiged because I enjoy leveling up the weapons enough to not want to bother resetting them. The maps are kind of bland but there aren't many I particularly hate and alot of the weapons are fun and satisfying to shoot. I still enjoy the multiplayer and will continue to go back to it long after Black Ops II's release.
This hasn't aged well. The dlc missions are fun for a bit but replayability is limited and as time has gone on I've grown to like the survival mode less and less. The base game missions are all pretty bland. They are more creative then MW2's but still really aren't much. Over-all this mode is still fun and isn't a bad addition to the game but it shouldn't effect whether or not you want to purchase.
- Multiplayer is addictive
- Multiplayer is well-balanced
- Spec Ops is fun
- Campaign is poorly written
- Campaign is forgettable
- Multiplayer maps are forgettable
- Spec Ops survival hasn't aged well
Well, looking back on it, this really isn't the "great finisher to the Call of Duty series" I wanted it to be. It currently has my favorite Call of Duty multiplayer but World at War and Black Ops come extremely close and I can see Black Ops 2 easily over-taking it. Spec Ops is fun but not worth much due to low replayability, even with the survival mode. Campaign is only worth playing if you've played MW1 and MW2 and need the story finished.
Especially considering that there is alot of over-priced dlc and the community hates the game with the multiplayer community beginning it's process of dieing out, the value of this game has become quite low. I originally recommended a maximum of $60 to spend on the game, now I must go lower.
- If you are a fan of the series and have most Call of Duties, I value it at MOST $30 USD
- If you simply want to finish the story started by MW2, rent it.
- Other-wise you can let this game pass on by and ignore it unless you find it at a bargain price of $15 USD
Let us hope Black Ops 2 does better. I do intend to release a review of both Black Ops 2 and the value of the Hardened Edition. Thanks for reading.