Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Review (6/10)

Nothing gives me greater pleasure than awarding Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 the score I have above. Does that sound a little harsh? It isn't- I've been waiting for ages now to be able to say definitively that this franchise is heading the same way as Guitar Hero, and believe me when I say that this latest instalment is absolute proof of that fact. So little has changed here bar the locations where the campaign and multiplayer are set that you might think this was DLC for 2009's Modern Warfare 2 (9.5/10), especially with the menu system and user interface looking pretty much identical to how they did in Infinity Ward's last stellar effort. As you'd expect for COD, the storyline is typically overblown and unrealistic, reeking of Michael Bay-esque melodrama and provoking a near-total sense of apathy from all but the most dedicated of war shooter fans. Worse still, despite a few fun setpieces, it barely scrapes past the four hour mark, and here lies the bug bear I hold with a lot of modern-day first person shooters: how do developers expect to still justify their £40 RRP when they are putting little-to-no effort into their single player campaigns, instead choosing to focus on the online modes? Yes, this is the best-selling entertainment launch ever, but I think people are beginning to notice that the single-player segment is both a) near identical to its predecessor and b) insanely short, and that the necessary similarities of the multiplayer each year mean that very little actually changes between consecutive Call of Duty games. I won't spend much time on the multiplayer- it's Marmite fare, in that you're either going to love it or hate it, likely taking the latter stance if you're new to the franchise because Activision are terrible at balancing series veterans and newcomers in their matchmaking modes. There really isn't much I can say now that I haven't said previously: love COD, and you may well love this, but I think for those who dare to call themselves 'hardcore gamers', this tiring franchise is on its way out, and frankly I'd say the sooner the better. However, I'm more than open to be proved wrong next year...this time, I won't be going in with high expectations.
THE SHOOTER WAR- WHO WON?
So, then, which first person shooter has come out on top in the grand war of 2011? Quite honestly, I'd say Battlefield 3 has managed to surpass expectations to an extent, still maintaining an absolutely stellar online segment despite a rather predictable campaign. While you most certainly know what you're getting with it, the console warfare of BF still feels new and fresh enough to keep it on top of Call of Duty, and that's good enough for me...for now. If BF4 pulls the same stunt in two years time, or indeed Medal of Honor 2 tries something similar against COD next year, I won't have forgotten this instance, so DICE and EA better watch their acts from 2012 onwards. Of course, we should actually bear in mind that there are tons of other great games out there which scored higher than these two modern warfare shooters this year- why not even indulge in some nostalgia, and treat yourself to Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary, a beautiful HD remake of the decade-old Xbox shooter? Ten years on, its innovation and sandbox world remains a lot more fun to play than COD and BF. Funny that...