Modern Warfare 3=A DISAPPOINTING GAME

Well, since I enjoy video games greatly, why not start blogging about them right? Today, I will be reviewing the overhyped, piece of dog poop known as Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3. The game's single-player, according to Gamefaqs, picks up where Modern Warfare 2's left off, where Cpt. John "Soap" MacTavish and Cpt. John Price of Task Force 141 attempt to once and for all neutralize Russian nationalist Makarov and prevent him from starting World War 3. To sum up Modern Warfare 3's story, just take every Michael Bay movie you have ever seen, put them in a blender and BAM, you get Modern Warfare 3. It's a traditional action story full of explosions and plot twists you can see coming from a mile away. If you have followed Call of Duty from number 4, this installment in the franchise will bring a satisfying conclusion to these characters you grew up with. The campaign will take you an average of 4-5 hours, traditional of big budget games these days, but who really buys call of duty for the single player right?

Now we dive into the meat of any cod game, the MULTIPLAYER. The multiplayer is not bad; it's just very disappointing. From a man who's been playing cod hardcore since 4, I was expecting so much more. First of all, the multiplayer plays EXACTLY like that of Modern Warfare 2's. To be honest I was not expecting any drastic changes, but when a game replicates its predecessors engine, can you really call it a full-fleged sequel or just a cash in? Secondly, the Infinity Ward, the oh-so glorious developer of this masterpiece, has incorporated a program known as lag compensation. To those unfamiliar with console shooters, shooters work at optimum when they are run on dedicated servers, an overall server where everybody will have equal connection when playing the game. Call of duty has always used a peer to peer matchmaking system where a single person in the lobby is the "host" or the person who is keeping the lobby open. The host will ALWAYS have the advantage in the game because, for instance, if the host and the opponent round a corner at the same time, the host's bullets will always reach the opponent first, even if they both shoot their guns at the same time. To remedy this "host advantage", the developers incorporated lag compensation where the program downgrades the a host's connection to simulate a dedicated server environment. This program , in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM, improves the playing experience at all. The program makes good people's connections bad, and makes bad people's connections even worse. According to vgchartz.com, Call of duty is the best-selling first person shooter franchise in the world, so why in the world can't the developers afford to invest in dedicated servers and get rid of the horrific lag compensation? Death streaks also make a return, rewarding players for continuously dying. Yeah, you read that right. THIS GAME REWARDS YOU FOR DYING. What kind of first person shooter rewards you for a death? A majority of the maps are a chore to play, being poorly designed and not probably not play tested at all.

On the brighter side of things the games controls are excellent holding to the cod standard of tight and responsive controls.

According to metacritic.com, this games average rating is 88 out of 100. I personally believe the score should be much lower as I would give the game a 3 out of 5 stars. The game is not a total bad game, its just as a hardcore cod fan, I was hoping so much more from the game. Heres hoping Black Ops 2 lives up to my expectations.

Image link: http://media.photobucket.com/image/modern%20warfare%203%20fail/tbdRoids/MW3FAIL.gif

Other links: http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3

http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/?name=modern+warfare+3&publisher=&console=&genre=&minSales=0.01&results=50

http://www.gamefaqs.com/xbox360/995751-call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3