In Defense of Modern Warfare 3

I’m not sure when exactly it happened, but gradually over the last two years or so, the tables have truly turned on the Call of Duty franchise. Back around the time of Call of Duty 4, World at War and Modern Warfare 2, it was the bee’s knees – a must-have game that had everyone addicted and everyone talking. It elevated online console gaming from the standard that Halo 2 had set to unforeseen levels, to the point of tens of millions playing the same game on all three platforms, and enjoying it was a near-unanimous decision, while ‘haters’ like me were sidelined and had our voices drowned out by the rabble.

I’m not going to preach about the ‘injustice’ of this. In retrospect, I can hardly understand what my problem was. I still hate Modern Warfare 2 and have distaste for World at War, but to be constantly shouting at people to stop enjoying a game that you don’t like is pointless and juvenile.

Not to mention that, well, the latest entry in the series has changed my opinion a little.

It took a couple more years until I was no longer in the minority of general opinion, but now as things stand, I’m not sure I like it. Call of Duty has gone from being a trailblazing, beacon of hope for multiplayer FPS, to a mocked and despised antichrist of a franchise, its name being used as a benchmark for any series that appears to be heading for the ‘recycle and reuse’ strategy, or as an epitome of a balls-out, ultra-masculine shooter. In all honesty, plenty of these claims are true, and it’s not totally unreasonable to blame a lot of the copycat behaviour of the industry on a leading series. Oddly enough, this turn of opinion apparently hasn’t affected sales, with ‘boycotts’ and claims of, ‘I am done with this series’ being met with record sales being broken with new records every year. Perhaps gamers are gluttons for punishment, or hypocrites, or the sales are coming from a near endless stream of casual gamers – regardless, I find the whole argument to be futile. Gamers turning against Call of Duty has made no difference, and at the end of it all, I find that few people are forgetting to do something very important: just enjoy the game.

As I mentioned before, I am no long-term fan of the Call of Duty series, but I was blown away by Modern Warfare 3. Sure, it’s drenched with the same old clichés that people have grown tired with, it doesn’t add anything massively new in the armoury department, but what it has gained is acceptance of itself. Call of Duty 4 was, if a little over the top, a fairly believable military shooter. Modern Warfare 2 took the same attitude in the wrong kind of game, asking you to care about a storyline that degraded into straight-to-DVD trainwreck quality and attempted to maintain both a sense of realism and intimacy with characters in a world that was blowing itself up for the dumbest reasons. Modern Warfare 3, as far as I see it, has thrown all that out the window, cranked up everything to 11 and stopped trying to fill any quota of plot that failed a long time ago. It’s not set in a troubled world in conflict, it’s a apocalyptic arcade of death and destruction, more Bulletstorm  than Medal of Honor.

For all the talk of ‘no graphical improvement since COD4’, Modern Warfare 3’s set pieces are colossal and awe-inspiring, the introductory view of New York in ruins is utterly outstanding and incomparable to any other rendition of the Big Apple in disrepair (and there are many out there). The same goes for Berlin, Hamburg, Prague and especially Paris – and it was the moment where the Eiffel Tower collapses before your eyes that I came to the conclusion that Modern Warfare 3 didn’t care any more whether or not you wanted to find Makarov or get Price’s vengeance ‘for the boys at Hereford’, but it did know that watching the world you know get blown to pieces is fun, and it was going to deliver that on every front.

Of course, I’m not speaking for the multiplayer which perhaps is where Modern Warfare 3 does lack. The truth is, it’s very similar to its predecessor, albeit with some much more balanced maps and less game-breaking killstreaks (i.e. no nukes) and to that I can’t contest. However, as much as it does really act as a newer mirror of its former self, I still can’t bring myself to see it as ‘bad’. It’s not really my thing, sure, with a pace too fast to coordinate any teamwork in, and a hierarchy of ‘more XP = better guns’ meaning it constantly bears down on the newbies, but in terms of doing what it aims to do, I can hardly fault it. The ‘noob tubing’ exploit is gone, there are only a select few overpowered or imbalanced weapons (not something that could be said for the much-heralded Counter Strike), and the custom class system is deeply personalizable and rewarding. Again, while it’s not my style of multiplayer, let them eat cake.

There will be plenty out there still unconvinced, and that’s fine. No game is for everyone, and after Call of Duty’s many iterations, it’s also fine to be bored of it. Soon, I’ll be bored of Modern Warfare 3 too, and move onto something else, and I’d simply ask those that troll the comment boards of gaming websites all over to do the same. There’s a whole host of the better games out there, better shooters too, but by no means is Infinity Ward’s latest title a shocking title worthy of such hate. But Black Ops 2… that remains to be seen.

About the Author

Henry McMunn The youngest of the Pixels or Death crowd, Henry is still enduring the horrors of the 'best days of his life' in education. He has an obsession with sequels and their franchise-ruining tendencies, a deep love for DICE and Remedy, and a bigger mistrust of the Japanese than your veteran grandfather. Who knows, maybe he'll be a big writer man one day.