The MW3 campaign is short, uneven, and unsatisfying
Video transcript:
Modern Warfare 3 is here and the campaign has a very important question to ask: how short is too short? Activision is really over here like hey, uh, is four hours enough? Like, games are hard these yearly releases are a bitch, sooo… yeah.
I’ve actually really enjoyed the recent campaigns from the Modern Warfare series, starting with 2019’s Modern Warfare and 2022’s Modern Warfare 2, so I should’ve been looking forward to part three and the continuation of the story. But something about this smelled funny from the beginning.
Let’s take a look at the timeline here: this should’ve been planned for 2025 as Infinity Ward’s next turn with the franchise, but shortly after MW2 came out there were reports that Activision was planning on moving away from the yearly releases, and instead release a new mainline game every two years. If this report was true, it’s a pretty safe bet that 2023 would just see a major DLC release instead, and Sledgehammer was probably brought in to do it. A few months later, after the massive success of Modern Warfare 2, Activision was like ‘what? We never said that. Of course we’ll have a full game release this year!’ And not only was it gonna be a full game, it was gonna be Modern Warfare 3.
These games take years to make, and from the outside looking in it seems pretty obvious Sledgehammer’s DLC was promoted to full game release less than a year ago before its release. And the single player campaign is pretty good evidence that this is, in fact, what went down.
Story
The story picks up after Modern Warfare 2 with the same cast of charact—wait, at least one of these characters was dead, I’m sure of it. Apparently some story stuff went down in Warzone, but I don’t play that so I’m pretty confused about some things story-wise. But let’s be real, it doesn’t matter.
Before I even played the game I could tell you with reasonable confidence that some crazy maniac has an army full of other crazy maniacs, and they’re hellbent on stealing and/or using a weapon of mass destruction. They might be trying to frame an ally, or our heroes might be facing backstabbers and traitors from within, or all of that once. There you go, I just described every modern shooter storyline in a nutshell. Now that I have played the campaign, yeah. That would be a dead-on description. It’s pretty basic stuff and there really aren’t any surprises here.
What is surprising is how flat it all feels compared to the previous Modern Warfare games, especially MW2. That was like an action movie and spy movie rolled into one, with some pretty great pacing and variety. That’s… not what you’re getting with MW3.
There are some interesting locations and clearly all these characters have a history with each other, but nothing meaningful is really happening from a narrative standpoint. This review is spoiler-free, but I’ll just say it has to be one of the most unsatisfying endings I ever played.
And it’s sad, too, because there’s a pretty great cast of characters to work with, including Farrah. She’s a great character that added a lot of depth to the storytelling in the previous games, but here she’s just as one dimensional as everyone else. Maybe that’s what bugs me from a story standpoint—no one has an arc. No one changes from the beginning to the end.
But the lackluster story isn’t even the campaign’s biggest issue. That, I believe, would be the pacing.
Gameplay
The pacing in the game is a drag, partly because there are so few standout moments, but mostly due to the new mission mode called Open Combat Missions. The idea here is that the missions zones are open and you can customize your loadout and go for the objectives however you want: loud and aggressive, silent and violent, or just make it up as you go. And these missions only have a few checkpoints, so each life is a little more precious. The idea is interesting, but the execution… well, let’s just say it’s not that interesting.
The first time you play each OCM, or Open Combat Mission, you start with a default weapon like a knife or a pistol. As you pick up items from supply drops they’ll be permanently added to your loadout options—for that mission only. So the only time your loadout is relevant at all is when you die or replay the mission. There are several of these Open Combat Missions, and I can tell you right now I have no intention of ever replaying one. Now there are load out stations on the map and you can use them mid-mission to switch back to a weapon you left behind or refill your ammo, but I didn’t find many of these stations and I usually found a nice weapon with a silencer and never looked back.
And while we’re talking about gameplay, let me point out I’m a fan of all kinds of games, from shooters to RPGs, racers, action, platformers… if you’re enjoying this video hit that like button and maybe check out my channel for a wide range of game reviews, remarks, and regrets.
So why did OCMs kill the pacing? CoD campaigns are usually pretty linear and heavily scripted, which is actually pretty fun because we get to see characters interacting with each other and stuff is usually happening all around us. There’s a level of insanity that you just come to expect in these games. But in an OCM we’re basically a lone wolf and there are no scripted events or mid-mission cutscenes. Sometimes it feels like playing a single player battle royale, but that’s sort of over-selling it. There’s really nothing innovative about these missions, they just feel like they were cobbled together from leftover Warzone parts.
Graphics
On the bright side, the whole thing looked super polished and ran smoothly for me. I was only able to play it on a Playstation 5, but I didn’t run into any graphical glitches and it never crashed on me. There were some standout locations like in the snow level. I don’t know why but I don’t think I’ve ever been disappointed with a level in a game that includes snow camo. Is it just me?
The interface for the game outside the missions is using the same Hulu menu design as the rest of the Call of Duty HQ. And, I don’t know, I’m just not a fan of this style of menu because I don’t think it’s possible to put less info on screen, so there’s way more scrolling than is necessary. It’s a small bone to pick but this interface is everywhere these days and I really think we need to move past it.
Where To Play
Call of Duty is playable pretty much everywhere besides the Nintendo Switch, and that includes last gen consoles. (PS5, Xbox Series S|X, PS4, Xbox One, PC, Steam)
Final Thoughts
OCMs were supposed to feel innovative and breathe new life into the single player experience, but instead they sort of come off feeling lazy or uninspired. Like when the teacher gives you busy work, like “hey here’s some bad guys and weapons, go do something with them while we keep making multiplayer maps and bug fixes”.
I really can’t find fault in Sledgehammer, I’m sure they were hoping to make a sequel to Vanguard instead, but that game sold way under expectations. It’s weird that they were brought in to make Modern Warfare 3, which is clearly Infinity Ward’s baby, and it’s really weird that it was rushed out the very next year.
I’m pretty sure there’s a juicy backstory here, but the bottom line is this campaign is short and boring, and completely fails at wrapping up the Modern Warfare trilogy. To call this a full campaign is greedy, even by Activision standards. I can’t help but give it a shell-shocked 👎
