* Prices may differ from that shownMore Offers
The call of duty series is know to provide better than average fps game particularly in the worl war 2 era. Fortunately COD 3 does not dissapoint. Its set in the world war 2 era like the previous titles and has you running and gunning germans throughout the campaign. The campaign let you play as the americans, the british the russian as well as the polish which offer good diversity in weapons.
The gameplay itself is great with some fantastic scripted events including a interactive cutscene of sorts when a soldier sneaks up on you for a melee attack. However the rest of it is the classic fps world war 2 gameplay as the previous titles.
The graphics are fantastic for the xbox with truly detialed enviroments and enemies. Music and sound scores top points as well. Although the series is slowly showing signs of repetition the game manages to hold its own.
The multiplayer experience is another fascinating part as you take the game online with friends. In a nutshell a great game and worth a shot
Coming from a younger generation of game players (I was really around for the Sega thing... or the SNES or NES or whatever it's called...), I think my expectations of current games are that of excellent graphics, smooth gameplay and some exciting characters.
In other words, I think this game was slightly a BIT before my time.
There wasn't much personality to the game, unlike the newer versions Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and Call of Duty: World at War, and I suppose at the time, I was happy with what it was, but after playing far more advanced games, I don't think I'd be happy going back to CoD3. Not that I'd say I was a game snob or anything...
On a more positive angle, the solo campaign is quite fun, but one you have to really get into. The multi-player is a bit dated, but if you're fine with that, then it's an enjoyable game to play.
One thing that this has that CoD4 lacks is the ability to ride vehicles, i.e. tanks and motorbikes (or the equivalent of that back in WWII), and that is very fun! CoD5 embraced this ability to drive tanks, which was a hit, but perhaps a bit annoying in the multi-player as anyone grounded is mince meat vs. those in armoured vehicles. Never mind, eh, it's all for the fun of it!
this is what happens when you let another team work on your game.. ok ok its an alrite game and carries on the cod franchise but not to the standards of the last two cod games (1 and 2). Cod 2 on the xbox was one of the first fps out for the 360 and it did a really good job as well keeping the same feel from the original on the pc, this get released in to a market place with alot of other good fps still around tho and struggles to really stand out in the competitive gaming arena.
Cod 2 remained dominant with competitive gamers because the way it played, smallish tactical maps, good amount of weapons which took skill to use. Cod 3 on the other hand introduced bigger maps, ok for snipers well campers should i say and then tanks aswell, it just shouts noobie. Battlefield 1942 worked with vehicles because of the sheer scale of the maps, but cod 3 maps wern't really big enough for them.
Call of duty 3 is one of the best games I have ever played. The reasons for this is because call of duty 3 I think made call of duty so big because of its online and offline game play.
The offline campaign has a great story to it and has many challenging tasks that have to be done to accomplish the game. There are a range of guns that can be used including grenades, smoke grenades, RPG'S and much more stuff than can be used including vehicles.
The online is great because it has a whole range of maps and game modes to play there is also maps that can be downloaded for this game. The disappointing thing about this online is that you can't choose what guns you want with different grenades and pistols because the classes are already set up for you. There is also no perks like call of duty 4 and call of duty world at war.
There are some vehicles online and offline as well that include tanks, jeeps and motorcycles as well.
There isn't really any disadvantages to this game apart from there are quite a few glitches online so people can cheat.
I think that this game is really good because it was the classic of the call of duty's and it made call of duty 4 and call of duty world at war what it is today.
The graphics I think are absolutely amazing on this game just because of the detail on everything on it.
Overall I think that this game is really good and will always be one of the most important games I have ever played.
With Call of Duty 3, developer Treyarch continues the acclaimed World War 2 series from where its creator Infinity Ward left off. Adopting the same tried and tested gameplay mechanics from the first two games, with a notable graphical overall, the game manages to live up to the expectations of fans of its predecessors.
The single player campaign unfolds from the point of view of American, British, Canadian and Polish soldiers, and the player is given the opportunity to fight as and along side soldiers from each of these nations at various points in the game. As I mentioned, the gameplay is as solid and satisfying as ever, but unfortunately does little to really propel the series forward.
The minor additions to the gameplay involve setting explosives or operating machines by mimicking the actions using the xbox 360 controller, but ultimately these mini-game-esque sections add little to the overall enjoyment of the game and can actually become quite tiresome after a while. Fortunately though, they are infrequent enough so as not to detract from the hugely enjoyable shooting action.
As always, the online multiplayer component is where the real value of this game is to be found, with some of the most enjoyable online action available on consoles.
Call Of Duty 3 is the sequel to the excellent Call of duty 2, for the Xbox 360 games console.
Like the previous game you experience the conflict from three soldiers different perspectives, the British, the Canadian and the French. Again all of these soldiers play identically so gameplay is kept straightforward.
The shooting is just a satisfying as the first game, the controls are identical and easy to get to grips with. They have added a couple of tweaks like now you can sprint and there are many driveable vehicles. They have also added quick time events where you must fight off enemy soldiers, and plant demolition charges.
The multiplayer mode has received the most changes, there were new game modes and they have introduced a class system much like the one in battlefield. In my opinion this makes the multiplayer much more fun and strategic.
This is a fantastic sequel so if you are a fan of the first game you should definitely pick this one up, you should be able to find it for 15 to 20 pounds.
I got my copy of COD3 on the day it was released and I am still playing it today. I must have played over 500 hours COD3 on my PC. It is the finest WW2 game I have ever played, you play as several different soldiers all across Europe. The story is vey engaging and you definitely get the feeling that you're participating in a huge war, with some stunning visuals. The first mission includes the most intense battle in any FPS I have played, with the new AI firing from everywhere and using gravestones as cover.
Playability- I play Call of Duty 3 mostly for the Multiplayer, so if you have a good internet connection Call of Duty 3 is a perfect first person shooter.
The single player is fantastic the combat in the game is incredible and there is nothing like it in any other game. The game is very enjoyable, if u like none stop action. There is never a dull moment and even though it's not a run n' gun FPS it certainly isn't slow paced.
Addictiveness-This game is unbelievably addictive. With so many options available like guns and maps, there is plenty of content to get stuck into without getting bored. The multiplayer is very solid
Graphics- 360 graphics are excellent and fortunately there no slowdowns, that the PS3 sometimes suffers. When these graphics are combined with the sound the result is an epic heart pumping all out war.
Sound- The sound in game is brilliant, the sound effects of the guns and background noises are as realistic a they get.
Longevity- You are likely to get at least 15 hours out of the single player and if you have a good internet connection, you are likely to get another 20 hours at least out of the multiplayer.
Playability & Enjoyment 8/10
Longevity/Expected Longevity 8/10
Conclusion- Great game, one of the best FPS I have played. If you buy this game you won't be upset.
The Call of Duty has been definitive over the years, despite the number of annoying spin-offs on the older platforms, like Call of Duty: The Finest Hour. Yes, the console versions were weakest compared to the PC versions and Xbox 360 versions, as the really did feel like spin-offs. It was probably because the developers changed and couldn't get the essence of the series. But with Call of Duty 3, the developer has changed and so has the platforms. Treyarch, creators of the Spiderman games, has stepped into the boots of Infinity Ward to develop Call of Duty 3, probably while Infinity Ward developed CoD4. The series has gone multiplatform, but does that hurt the quality or mean more ways to play it?
Because World War II has been done to death since Medal of Honour first blasted on the old Playstation, there isn't much plot to give now and that is especially known in Call of Duty 3. The game focuses on the Normandy Breakout, which occurred after the Nazis landed on the beaches of France. The focus is on forcing the Germans out of the country, as other countries like America and British joined together to try and push them out. You take the role of several fighters from each country and all the countries have their unique characters. The British has a soldier who doesn't particularly like the French despite working with them and the American has a Radio Operator who is dying to prove he isn't a coward. But the plot isn't really interesting as it's been done before. It's definitely not as good as CoD4, with sometimes annoying characters and predictable twists.
Call of Duty 3 controls mostly like its predecessor as well as most first-person shooters. The aiming is perfect and the guns feel natural, but there are a couple of quirks. Firstly, throwing grenades is a pain in the butt. You'll long to be able to simply press the bumper you throw your own grenades with to chuck the others back, like in CoD4. You have to pick it up by holding down the X button and then press the throw button before it explodes in your hands. It's too much in the middle of battle. Another issue, which is prevalent in CoD4, is the commands which involve you pressing down on the sticks can lead to accidental deaths. If you don't crouch, hold your breath or use the binoculars in time because you accidentally press it forward instead of pushing it down then you're screwed. While the issues are annoying, they don't break the controls, or the game for that matter.
Call of Duty 3 plays like a Call of Duty game. It's a first-person shooter where it's all about aiming properly. While you can shoot from the hip, it's only best in tight situations where the enemy is close. This is due probably because of a lack of aiming reticule which means it's hard to aim without something to aim with. Aiming makes shooting easier, as even without an aiming reticule there the gun will appear and a part of the gun where you aim makes it easier to shoot. It's best to stay in cover and shoot from a distance, while you pick off enemies one bit at a time. It would have been nice if a cover system was implemented but it's not a big issue. You can jump, crouch and even lie on the floor if you need to. It definitely doesn't stray too far from its predecessors, which means if you tired of the Call of Duty games after 2, then this won't be for you.
Call of Duty 3 is full of intensity and never lets up. The first level starts with a tutorial, which may make the game look harmless. That is until your truck taking you to the mission gets blown up and you are thrown to the ground. Once that happens, the mission continues as you charge through a cemetery taking out those Nazi scums! The first level is one of the best in gaming, as so much is happening at once. Soldier's corpses lay on the ground nearby, bullets and smoke grenades are flying everywhere and all hell has broken loose, it's incredibly intense. The rest of the levels aren't quite as intense as that, but Call of Duty 3 is still one of the most action packed games to date on the 360. It makes the game, as a whole, make you feel like you're in a large war and quite immersive.
The mission objectives don't change much through the game though. You'll get the standard 'go from point A to point B' objectives, clear an area of Nazis, destroy objects with explosives and more. That's not to say the game gets too repetitive, as there are lots of different moments. One level, you're travelling on foot taking out Germans in a town, while the next you're driving a Jeep, and then you're in a tank shooting up other tanks. It feels like CoD4, except in World War II which was an amazing game. That said, it's maybe a little too similar to its predecessor and sequel. The main objects have a least a couple of smaller objectives to complete, which are marked on your map with a star. There are a couple of moments where you can choose a path and objectives differ. For example, in the level before last you can choose to go through the trenches and take out enemies in those or go into a bush and be a sniper. These help add some flavour and choice to the game.
It's a shame that the non-linearity stops there. The game is constantly throwing you on the right path. For example, in one of the Jeep levels if you make a wrong turn a guy with a dodgy accent will yell something like 'wrong way!' until you are on the right path. Unlike CoD4, you can't find any items during the level like notes from diaries which would have made the game more replayable. What's more annoying, however, is constant invisible walls blocking you from going out of bounds. Whether its doors that magically opens when you should be going through them, or flat out invisible walls, the game is frustrating when you can't explore. The levels aren't as cramped as Clive Barker's Jericho at least, but they can be just as linear.
Another annoyance is mini-games. Scattered throughout each level are quicktime events. The main time you'll use mini-games is planting bombs onto objects that need, well, to be blown up! You'll press a button, twist the analog a stick, press another button and that's done. It's a wonder why it couldn't have just been a cutscene, plus it's annoying that they constantly keep changing the buttons you have to press. The worst criticism, however, is the new close-quarters combat events. Basically, you'll randomly be jumped out by a Nazi, which had me wondering whether they were trying to do something dirty to me, and you have to press a series of buttons to force these guys off you. The buttons you have to press keep changing, and they only happen around five times in the whole game, which means they are not really worth it.
The game's difficulty is slightly frustrating. If you thought that the other Call of Duty games were a little too hard, then your mind won't be changed here. It's slightly harder than the already hard Call of Duty 4. You must take advantage of cover, as just running into a group of people will get you killed. But even when in cover, you may find a couple of times that you just died randomly, which is annoying. The game uses recharging health, but it doesn't help when you are nearly dead after a few shots. It's also worth noting that there are some minor glitches in the game. The smallest issue is that you will see a corpse floating in the game. The worst is that you won't be able to complete a mission because one of your squad got caught on an object and the even wouldn't trigger. You'd have to restart from a checkpoint, which means you'd have to do a section again. The glitches can be forgiven though, as they were an issue a couple of times in the whole game.
The multiplayer makes a return after CoD2, which was disappointing seeing as only eight people could play online. It was a launch game I guess, but it was a bit annoying. Now, 24 people can play in online, including four on one box. The game has a set of character classes, including medic for healing people, Heavy Assault with the standard gun who can also plant mines and more. But Call of Duty 4 had better multiplayer because of its ranking system and better character classes. It's also chaotic as 12 on 12 can be crazy with the health system that goes down after a few bullets. There are nine maps and six match types including team deathmatch and capture the flag. You'll earn achievements for trying out the different classes, and its worth it too as it adds some variety. However, if you have played Call of Duty 4, it will feel like a step back.
The game is rated 15+ for strong violence. The game has blood, as when you shoot enemies blood spurts from their bodies. You won't see heads and limbs flying off though, and the language and other references are kept to a minimum. The game is quite hard, though, so it's not a game for casual shooter fans or casual gamers in general. But it won't be offensive to anyone experienced with blood and guts, so I'd say if you can handle it, anyone over the age of 9 could play Call of Duty 3 and not have nightmares...
Call of Duty 3 looks great. It's not quite as good looking as Call of Duty 4, as minor slowdown on the 60 frames per second and weird glitches like corpses floating in the air detract a bit from the quality. But it still is a looker. The environments look gorgeous, as you troll along war torn buildings, beautiful countryside and other cool places. The character models look great with nice subtle details like the net on their helmets, plus they animate smoothly during and not during gameplay. The smoke effects are great, so dense that you may squint to see. Textures look nice, even if a couple of them repeat a bit too often like the house environment. Draw distance is near perfection, as you see objects far in the distance, even with annoying invisible walls. And the frame rate only usually chops up in really intense situations. But CoD4 did it without slowdown, so it's disappointing this doesn't keep up.
The sound in Call of Duty 3 is some of the best on the system. Despite a couple of dodgy accents, the voice acting is solid with some quality moments of dialogue, like when a dying Sergeant tells someone to pass on that 'Guzzo should go to hell' instead of telling him something like 'you aren't that bad'. But what makes the sound so fantastic is the effects and music. Music sounds like something you'd hear from a WWII documentary, with trumpets wailing and it perfectly fits Call of Duty 3. As you're walking along without any action, someone gets shot in the head and the music starts again. Gunfire sounds great, but what makes Call of Duty 3 sound amazing is its how much it sounds like a war. Bullets are flying everywhere, explosions shake your head and a lot more immerses you into the game. Your squad will yell to you on the battlefield as if hell has broken loose, and if you have surround sound then be prepared for perfection.
-(The Replay Value)-
CoD3 is well worth it's now cheap price. The single player will take you a good twelve hours to complete, which is good for a shooter. You'll replay it if only to get achievements you missed out on the first time. Speaking of achievements, Treyarch have taken great advantage of Microsoft's unique system. The game may only have 26 achievements, which isn't comparable to the likes of Gears of War or The Darkness, but the achievements are fantastic. Sure, you get the standard ones for completing the campaign, but there are lots of unique ones too. When has a game told you that if you can complete a level without firing a gun you get an achievement worth 100 points? And trust me, that's not easy feat. The game doesn't reward you much for the menial tasks, but pull something big off like not firing a bullet in a level and you will be greatly rewarded. The multiplayer will be fun and keep you busy, though some may argue that you'd just play CoD4 for multiplayer.
-(The Ending Comments)-
Call of Duty 3, despite change of developer and multiplatform development, is a quality shooter on the 360, despite the large number of them on the system. While World War II has pretty much been done to death, this game proves that even using the setting you can still feel fresh. It has terrific visuals, quality sound, a lengthy single player and fantastic multiplayer. But really, this is what I said about its sequel, Call of Duty 4, which was set in modern warfare. If you have the choice between this and CoD4, go with Call of Duty 4 as the modern warfare will refresh you, and it's the better experience out of the two. However, if you have yet to play this and have tired of Call of Duty 4, it will give you more fun, even if it's a little too similar. Any fan of World War II shooters should definitely try Call of Duty 3, as well as shooter fans. Just don't expect it to reinvigorate the shooter.
-(The Extra Info)-
This was published by Activision and developed by Treyarch.
This was released on November 10, 2006 and is also on PS2, PS3, Xbox and Wii.
This is available from Amazon from £9.00 in the used and new section.
Having played this after call of duty 4: modern warefare, it just doesnot compare. With this game you still get one of the most annoying features of the Call of duty game, a huge pile of rubble between you and the germans so ther is only one way round, straight in to the line of Kraut fire!!!!!
This is especially annoying when you know that in real like it would be a piece of cake to climb up that mound and down the other side quickly. Why do they bother with it???
Another thing is the missio set up, no matter what you do the man in the pill box or window with the machine gun never dies no matter how many times you fire shots with any gun into his head. Even witha sniper rifle. and the annoying thng is at a distance where a rifle struggles to be accurate he manages to hit you repeatidly while you are lying on the ground behing a tank trap or between a very small gap in sandbags!!!
Don't Mention The War
War, huh, what is it good for? Err, making computer games perhaps?
The Hun are back and in need of slaughtering again. In the third outing of Activision's excellent Call of Duty series. So we're in familiar territory. This time the liberation of Paris is the goal.
You play four different soldiers on the side of the British, Canadian, French. Each playing a role in the same scenario. The action is in the first person as usual.
WWII has been covered a lot in recent years, some people are getting bored
with them. I have to say though that I still love em'
This has been made by a different studio to all of the other Call of Dutys to date, this time is Treyarch whereas it's usually Infinity Ward. So have they delivered? The short answer is, yes they have. This is probably the best WWII shooter I've played (and I've played a lot). It really feels like you are in the heart of the action.
Graphically the game is stunning, the attention to detail is excellent. The only
dodgy aspect is the lip sync on some of the cut scenes but who cares about that. I have noticed only a few minor things, like a gun popping out of a wall very occasionally and once one of my team mates disappeared, but this is a very rare occurrence and does not detract from the game. The lighting effects are especially good, I love the smoke grenades. Everything runs smooth and I've noticed no slow downs even with intense battles on screen going on.
The Campaign is longer than I was expecting, some have said it's too short but I found it to be a good length. I will definitely be playing through it on the harder settings. However I have one gripe with the campaign, it just seems to end. One minute you're in the heart of the action and next you've won the war. Almost like they ran out of development time.
One small annoyance is that sometimes your colleagues just stand right in
the way and make it difficult to get around them, or just run in front of your bullets, I guess that can happen in real life though.
Some levels have you driving a jeep or a tank, this adds a little variety to the game. There are much use of the sniper rifle though, which is a shame as I love picking off enemies with precision.
I can certainly recommend this game to anyone who likes WWII FPS. This is
as good as it gets on current consoles. It has quite a lot of replay value on different difficulty settings, I look forward to going back through it on the difficult level now I have completed it on normal.
I can't comment on the multiplayer as I've not got a Xbox Live account yet
(I need more practice first).
You can pick this up quite cheap now so value for money is excellent.
I am looking forward to getting my hands on Call of Duty 4 now as I understand it's one of the best games on the 360.
I can only write this review on the multiplayer, as that is all i have played, however i feel this game is strong enough with just the multiplayer.
I got both COD 2 and 3 at the same time so i am not playing 3 until i have completed 2. However i thought I'd have a play at the multiplayer.
Offline its pretty terrible. Usually i have one of my friends over to play against, but the levels are so big that we spend half the time playing just trying to find each other. However when we get online, its another story. I'd like to think we together we make rather a good team. Always in the top 5 in any game. There is great fun in finding what weapon we want to use in certain levels. There is also a large amount of fun in finding thte best areas in the game and taking over them.
There are some downsides, with some of the levels being a bit rubbish, or the odd one of two online players that do not wish to play properly (killing their own team mates). However these are small points on the whole, and it is still a lot of fun.
This truly is the best ww2 shoot em up ever created for any system. Period. This game truly unleashes the power of the xbox 360. Whether it is watching as a grenade leaves a hole in the floor and the water fills up in this hole or as bullets fly past your head at lightning speed there is no other game as realistic as this. You actually feel as if you are part of one of the four allied forces during the battle of Normandy.
The missions are detailed and long which ensures that this game will be in your console for some time to come especially if you play it on one of the more advanced levels. Also when the campaign is over with you can go onto xbox live and truly unleash the power of the game were up to 25 players can take part in either war, capture the flag or carnage. I feel the titles of the gameplay modes tell all that is needed. You can also take control of bikes, cars and even tanks as you battle your way through normandy as either the British, Polish, Cannadian or Americans.
The cut scenes are extremely well designed, however they cannot be skipped which can become slightly annoying at times.
However considering the new RRP of this game which is £24.99 there is no excuse for this not to be part of your xbox 360 collection.
Simply amazing. Please give it a look.
Thank you for reading my review.
R.I.P to all those people lost through war
"It takes a real man to make peace not war."
There wasn't any other game on the XBox 360 I was looking forward to as much as Call of Duty 3. It was a solid launch title for the 360, and a firm multiplayer favourite still even now, so surely Call of Duty 3 should have stormed in and taken the crown as the 360's best first person shooter, but it hasn't.
I should point out that CoD3 is actually by a different developer, Treyarch. They made the PS2 and Gamecube versions of Call of Duty (Finest Hour and Big Red One), and while they were good, they weren't anything near as good as the PC games by Infinity Ward (who also made CoD2 on 360). I'm not sure why, but apparently both developers are going to 'take turns' at developing the Call of Duty games from now, with Infinity Ward making all the even numbered games and Treyarch making all the odd numbered ones. I haven't a clue why Activision (who publish all of them) are having them do it like this, but at least that means Call of Duty 4 should be brilliant.
But even so, Call of Duty 3 isn't a bad game, far from it; it's just trying to play catch up with Call of Duty 2, and despite everything it does well, it doesn't quite match it. However, the part that is significantly better is the visuals. The character models look much better, and overall it is more distinctively next-gen. The weather effects aren't dynamic (ie. it's all pre-rendered, so rain does fall through buildings, and mysteriously vanishes when you enter any etc.), but it does look fantastic. The smoke effects are even better than before, but the most impressive thing is the sheer amount of things happening at once. Although they're all pre-rendered again, there are some brilliant set-pieces, with buildings been blown to pieces and groups of soldiers fighting everywhere. It really creates a believable atmosphere that's miles ahead of any other WWII game. Your troops are actually helpful, and they do actually kill enemies. They'll warn you of incoming fire or grenades, but they usually don't advance unless they're following you, which is the only spoiler. But it means that the game doesn't feel like you're a one-man army out to save the world (much like Medal of Honor games for instance). You need to rely on your squad to pull their weight too, and usually they do.
The gameplay is almost unchanged from last time, and pretty much everything is exactly the same. However, they have tightened the controls, but at the expense of speed, which becomes more noticeable in multiplayer. And there are some unusual live-action video sequences which require you to press buttons to progress (or stay alive). I really like how it's done in say setting a C4 charge, as you actually feel like you are setting a charge, and it's a nice touch, but the surprise close-combat parts aren't as good. Basically, it's a reaction test followed by button mashing. It completely ruins the atmosphere, and it's totally unnecessary.
On a more positive note, the new vehicles are a welcome addition, and really quite good. The tank sections are also more fun, and help break the relentless action up a bit.
But the major reason I don't like this as much as CoD2 is because of the multiplayer. Granted, there are new and more focused game modes. You can use vehicles, and they even included bazookas, so how did they get it so wrong? Online it's everything they promised, but the offline mode is just ruined. Most of the vehicles are gone. You can still use bikes, but so much else is also cut down. You can't use smoke grenades for instance, which was always fun in CoD2. The stages are designed for full-scale 24-player death matches, so even playing 4-player split screen it becomes hard to find each other, and some stages you're lucky to even spot anyone at all. And the radar/compass is pointless - on CoD2 it showed where gunshots were coming from, and in CoD3 it still does; however, it is near impossible to spot, and most of the time it never shows up anyway, so finding each other is made even harder. Basically, they ruined what was our favourite part of the game, and as such, it is probably why I sound so negative about it. However, it is still undoubtedly better than the Medal of Honor series, and it is one of the 360's best first person shooters. It's just that the older Call of Duty 2 is much better.
I'm still unsure if I like the single player campaign better than Call of Duty 2's however. It is more visually stunning and has more brilliant set-pieces, but Call of Duty 2 is more varied and has some simply massive-scale assaults, which CoD3 lacks. I suppose which one you prefer is simply a matter of what you want from an FPS. Call of Duty 2 is more action packed and faster, Call of Duty 3 is more tactical and has a much better atmosphere. And although Call of Duty 3 has better online modes, Call of Duty 2 simply blows it away with offline multiplayer, and it is still our multiplayer game of choice on the 360.
So overall, it's still a great game, beaten only by its predecessor, Call of Duty 2.
Being an avid player of C.O.D.3 and having read the reveiws, I tend to agree, its an awsome game. My only draw back is the on line glitches/cheats, as they are not easily found, and for the people who know them, can and usually does make for an uneven and unfair game. (not much fun if your new to the game). It is still a good game and worth a try.
War, what is it good for? Apart from inventions such as the microwave it has also become a rich vein of inspiration for computer games in the past few years. Games have gone as far back as Ancient Rome to far futures on alien planets. However, if there is one war that comes out head and shoulders above the others in the most oversaturated war market, its World War Two. You can fly planes, ride tanks, work alone, in groups, you can be a general or a grunt pretty much anything (except be a Nazi). One franchise that has managed to drag itself out of the quagmire of similar games is the Call of Duty (COD) series. COD prides itself on its links with real life soldiers and tries to be sympathetic to the real life events, but do the games succeed?
COD3 is the second next generation title to be released on the 360 in the series and should therefore be able to highlight some of the best features of the console. Like COD2 you play the game through a number of characters that are from different nations. Unlike the last game though all the mission are linked to one major cause, the taking of a town to prevent the Nazi retreat after D Day. This means that after one mission finishes you immediately go over to another character whose path has just been cleared. With plenty more Nazis on the loose can COD3 live up to the standards of 2?
In most way COD3 is a standard first person shooter (FPS) meaning that the action takes place from within the character with you looking out. You control a given character and are awarded for completing different goals. These sections feel very intense as you often come under heavy fire from the enemy. The game is heavily scripted so that bad guys only appear when you cross a certain invisible line, this can often lead to you losing your suspension of disbelief. However, these scripted parts also lead to some of the best sections of the game where you follow the intense action all around you.
Your character is only allowed to carry too weapons at once and up to six grenades. Depending on what type of player you are you can try to get close to the enemy or, like me, stay back and snipe. If you have played any other FPS shooter you should be very used to the central dynamics of the game. However, I believe that the real world setting of WW2 gives the game a much stronger sense of realism than any game set in the future. You are unlikely to get a more action packed game than this and that proves to be its greatest asset.
As well as the core FPS elements of the game COD3 does have some extra neat features. When you play as the Poles you are able to ride a tank. This works quite well and lasts for about the correct length to remain fun. A final element is the driving of jeeps. This does not work as well and the controls feel quite loose. Perhaps the best new innovation is the sections when you are set upon by an enemy and you are forced into a button pressing mini game. As odd as this sounds it actually works well.
COD3s gameplay is intense and fun but does feel very similar to COD2.
(4 out of 5)
One of the major selling points of the Call of Duty series is its online multiplayer levels. There are several different games to choose; from death match to capture the flag. Unfortunately, I am one of the poor saps who have not taken their 360 online so have yet to sample the delights of the online play. I did have a go on the two player mode setting up my own game and it was a lot of fun. I think for those interested in this side of gaming the multiplayer could be COD3 best feature. (5 out of 5)
Although not the longest game available COD3 makes up by having different levels of difficulty that have a major impact on the way the game plays. Too often in a game you will increase the difficulty only to play the exact same way but with more enemies. In COD3 your energy becomes a lot more lifelike so it forces you to assess any given situation in the same way you would do if it where real.
Another element that COD3 has embraced on the 360 to increase longevity is fine use of the Achievement system. You are rewarded for completing the game on different difficulties levels but also fun quests like finishing a mission without firing a bullet! The achievements actually add a lot of fun elements and make you want to play the game in a different way to see what happens. (4 out of 5)
The graphics for COD3 have not really moved on from the last game. This is not really that much of a deal as COD2 had some of the best graphics on the console. However, with the likes of Gears of War and Viva Piñata being released since the bar has risen. The graphics are good just not excellent. There is also an issue with glitches in this title that were not apparent in its prequel. They do not exactly break the game but they do make for some funny scenes like the chair that floated in mid air. (3 out of 5)
Here is perhaps the biggest flaw of the game. There are plenty of levels (15) but because this adventure is set around the same town they all feel very similar. While in other war games we can have one level in the city, the next in the country, the next the dessert. Here, we have numerous levels all based around village and town fighting.
Another criticism would be that the levels feel forced and linear. Sections are artificially blocked off and you feel pushed to go down a certain corridor. The best games get away with this by making you feel like you are meant to go that way anyway. The programmers have added some sections were you can choose your objective but this does not save the game from feeling samey. (3 out of 5)
The sound of the game is awesome. With a decent surround sound there is nothing quite like the experience of running across a field as hundreds of bullets fly past you. Your buddies cry out challenges to the enemy whilst the Nazi shout in German to try and put you off. With such busy fighting the constant drone of gun fire can be quite intrusive but for me this just adds to the game and highlights the moments of quiet calm before all hell breaks loose again. (5 out of 5)
So, is Call of Duty 3 worth a purchase on the 360? I think it all depends on your experience with the series and the genre. The 360 has had it fair share of FPSs and other great games out this Christmas so you have to be special to stand out from the crowd. Unfortunately COD3 is not special enough for me. Gears of War is the must have of this winter and perhaps Viva Piñata for something a bit more reserved. On its own COD3 is an excellent title but its similarities to its prequel make it a brash purchase for someone who owns COD2 already.
However, if you do not own COD3 and have played GOW then this game would be an excellent purchase. The experience is intense and unlike any other game you will play on the 360. It lasts long enough if you are willing to try all difficulty levels and the achievements are amongst the best on the console. For multiplayer fans that want something that plays like a quality traditional online FPS this game could also work. Overall, I give it 4 out of 5, but I hope for some major improvements to the next title in the series if thats to be worth buying.
Cost: amazon uk - £37.99
Play.com - £37.99
COD3 is also available in the Xbox, PS2 and PS3. If you find it cheaper on these, perhaps they would make a better bargain?