The Call of Duty franchise, renowned for its high-octane action and, more often than not, narrative-driven single-player campaigns, has hit a stumbling block with its latest installment, Modern Warfare 3. Players who had accessed Modern Warfare 3 early through digital editions were met with a campaign that failed to live up to even the lowest standards. A plethora of early access reviews and firsthand accounts have painted a disappointing picture of the game's campaign, one that not only feels abbreviated but is also lacking in depth and respect for its predecessors.
The first grievance comes with the campaign's length. The duration of a typical Call of Duty campaign ranges from five to eight hours. This has been a hallmark of the series, striking a balance between brevity and entertainment. However, Modern Warfare 3's campaign is alarmingly short, even for a Call of Duty game. It averages around three to five hours to complete, which is a significant reduction in playtime compared to previous iterations. The internet couldn't help but poke fun at Modern Warfare 3's abbreviated campaign, with many expressing dissatisfaction at its brevity, especially as a full-priced game. Worse still is that Activision tried to justify Modern Warfare 3's humongous file size due to how much content it has at launch, which is now a laughable claim given how bare and empty gameplay feels.
Secondly, the campaign's structure and execution have raised eyebrows. The game features 15 missions, which is a slight decrease from its predecessor's 17. The campaign's narrative thrusts players into a globe-trotting adventure, including a revisit to locations such as Verdansk. However, players have criticized the overuse of certain locales and the purported "open-ended" missions which, instead of offering meaningful freedom, come across as directionless and isolated, devoid of the team dynamics and high-stakes choreography that fans have come to expect from the series.