Epic Fail of the century - User Reviews - www.GameInformer.com
Switch Lights

The lights are on

Epic Fail of the century

This game has failed in so many ways, its hard to understand why people actually play this game. Lets start with the campaign. The campaign starts off promising, with your squad working their way through New York City during a Russian assault. This first mission displays some of the failures to show that the developers even care about the game at all. The entire experience is breathtakingly linear and uninteractive, as the whole campaign plays like a game of follow-the-leader. The whole way, you have a fellow soldier holding your hand leading you through all the missions. The cutscenes are told by using mugshots and marked maps with voice-over narrations that fail to elicit any kind of coherent plot. It almost seems like the missions were chosen first and then the story was crafted around them. The story only clocks in at about 5 hours that are, basically, recycled missions from previous COD titles and rip-offs from movies such as The Bourne Identity and The Hunt for Red October. The graphics are in 720p at 60 fps, which is actually impressive if you think about that on an Xbox 360. It would only be awesome if they stayed there. I encountered multiple texture pop-ins, framerate issues, sound glitches, and much more. I personally would rather have the framerate at 30 fps with textures and animations that dont look like Super Mario on the NES. Not to mention that it looks like a game from 2007. The story is somewhat good, but the entire plot is you and your team getting some intel and Makarov's location, and when you show up, he isnt there. This repeats a total of 3 times. So you are basically playing 3 different sets of the same missions. The weapons appear unique and useful, but none of them struck me as being more effective than the others (not including snipers and rocket launchers). They all seem the same to me. And since when does a throwing knife kill someone when it hits them in the foot? Just wondering. The sound is not what I expected. The weapons sounded weak and some of them sounded like nerf guns. I can recall the SCAR sounding like someone was shaking the weapon's screws loose. The rocket launchers sound like firing a rock out of an air compressor hose. The grenade explosions are underexaggerated and sound like someone throwing a handful of poppers at the ground. The vehicle explosions, on the other hand, are overexaggerated. I threw a flashbang near a car,(thats right, I said flashbang) and the car burst into a ball of flame, killing everyone near it with its incredibly large blast radius. In multiplayer, a lot of the weapons are either severely over or underpowered. I just could not find a weapon that had the right amount of damage to function well, or you could use without feeling like a ***. The shotguns are inconsistent in terms of range and damage. The shotguns have a range cap so that when the pellets reach a certain range, they just vaporize into thin air. Ive had multiple instances where I have my sights clearly on an enemy, pulled the trigger, and the pellets stopped right in front of him and he took no damage at all. I found that many weapons seemed unfarmiliar to me, so I researched them a little. Some of the weapons featured in the game do not even exist. The weapon known as the CM901 has incredible similarities to the SCAR-L. The Type 95 is actually based off of designs of the FAMAS and a weapon called the L85A2. This link shows a picture of the L85 as featured in Battlefield 3: http://battlelog-cdn.battlefield.com/public/profile/bf3/stats/items_512x308/xp1_l85a2.png?v=590 Here is a link to the Type 95 from MW3: http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/365/4/4/mw3__type_95_by_fpsrussia123-d4ktn6h.png Many of the multiplayer weapons just seem pointless. And the game gives off an overall feel of no developer effort whatsoever. I cannot believe that this game was well received. I hope that people wake up and see this game for what it is, a recycled failure.
Comments

No one has commented on this article.