Call of Duty’s Modern Warfare 3 (MW3) has triggered a cascade of opinions in the gaming community. One particular user, known as ChadratIII, has questioned the alleged $450 Million budget and its correlation to the perceived game quality.
Summary
- The game’s campaign has been criticized for lacking depth and creativity, with some suggesting it was rushed to match the franchise’s release cycle.
- Despite the controversy, the game’s multiplayer mode seems to be its redemption, with many players expressing genuine enjoyment.
- A common criticism focuses on the skill level disparity among multiplayer contestants.
- Critically, some users feel the game is a rehash of an older release, rather than a new, innovative installment.
A Question of Value
Dive deeper into the debate, and you unearth a treasure trove of thoughts. ‘wow_aredditor’ suggests the money likely went into graphics and rushed game production. Whereas, ‘WraxJax’ shares disappointment in the potentially good story that fell short because of the open combat mission structure.
The Saving Grace of Multiplayer
Despite the qualms, the multiplayer aspect comes out shining. ‘TheAdsAreHere’ considers it ridiculously fun. In contrast, the skill gap issue raised by ‘Beastcu’ raises an inherent competitive problem – being paired against players of significantly higher levels during beginners’ first games.
Reflecting on the Franchise
‘RuggedTheDragon’ asserts MW3 as a decent game, considering its age. ‘user303909’ takes a more pragmatic view, underscoring the franchise’s essential focus on its multiplayer mode rather than story campaigns, rating MW3 a solid 7-8.
Overall, MW3 seems to stir the pot in the Call of Duty community, igniting both amusement and frustration. The lovable multiplayer mode serves as a beacon of hope, yet the question about the game’s true value remains hanging. The game industry surely keeps us glued, doesn’t it?