But graphics don’t matter if the game doesn’t play well. This is where COD3 falters, somewhat. Why? Except for a very gimmicky close encounter mini game, and a simple bomb arming button sequence (God of War), COD3 plays exactly the same as COD2. For instance: the controls are identical; L-Trigger aims, R-Trigger fires, A and B are used for crouching and jumping, etc, and so is the experience of taking out Germans. The guns just don’t have the punch and distinguishing characteristics that other titles (such as Gears of War) have. They feel light, almost weak, despite the fact that on Normal game mode they can drop enemy troops with just one shot. There is no visceral feeling of “Yes I am firing (insert gun here) at an enemy.” It was lost somewhere in the process and this does hurt the experience. Is it enough to make the game not worth your time? Not at all, just don’t expect the same satisfying experience of Halo and Gears when firing a gun.
Surprisingly, the sound in COD3 is actually one of the less noticeable aspects about the title. Maybe we’ve become too used to how amazing the franchise has become. But not once through my various times through the campaign did I sit there and become awed by the sound. If anything the guns don’t sound as powerful as they used too, and the overused German shouts from COD2 still haven’t provided that immersive and realistic feel that they probably should.
Probably the biggest difference that Call of Duty 3 brings to the table, though, is its multiplayer component. While the standard deathmatch and team deathmatch are still there, it is the new Battlefield clone that is surprisingly loads of fun. The maps can be anywhere from big to small, but thankfully none of the objectives are so far away that it takes ages to reach them. Gone is the “walk for thirty seconds only to die” problem, which the Battlefield franchise has yet to fix. The matches are fun, frantic, and a downright blast. Players now have to choose a class of solider they wish to be, each with it’s own unique abilities. Anti-Tank and Support classes drop ammo, Medics heal, and Scouts have sniper rifles and the ability to call in air strikes (which are amazing to watch on screen). In addition to classes, COD3 also sports vehicles. The tanks work pretty well, but the motorcycle is a downright horror to drive, with the jeep falling somewhere in between these two. Matches are pretty much won and lost based on who controls the tank, or who has the superior sniper on their team. Still though, it is a fun game to play online.
Call Of Duty 3 is a good sequel and the best Call of Duty experience yet. What hurts the game though is that it plays a lot like previous COD games, to the point that it is very noticeable, but not altogether a bad thing. The graphics and guns also don’t show off like the more impressive titles do. But the real question is, is this game worth buying? I would say if FPS are your thing, then yes, get this title. The new take on the missions, and the new multiplayer are enough to keep hardcore fans happy. But even if you aren’t a FPS die-hard, and just want an exhilarating experience, then COD3 can provide that too.
Pages
| The Core Score |
Overall
8.9 |
| Fun |
|
9 |
| Gameplay |
|
8.5 |
| Graphics |
|
8 |
| Audio |
|
7.5 |
| Replay |
|
8.5 |
|
| Kid Safe Score |
| 6 Good |
 |
| |
Intense action with a lot of death does occur in droves in this title. There is also swearing and some intense melee combat that may concern some parents. |
|
|
|
