Call of Duty 3
Posted January 2, 2007
When the Xbox 360 hit the streets, one of the must own titles was the incredible Call of Duty 2, and over the course of the year that game became a "complete" title. The graphics were incredible and the gameplay was seriously addictive. Eventually they even got the multiplayer aspect of the title near perfection. Nearly one year later, Activision handed the reigns to Treyarch to release Call of Duty 3. Treyarch is the company that brought us the simultaneously loved and hated Call of Duty 2: Big Red One, so there was much debate among internet forums questioning whether they could pull off a game like Call of Duty 3 with as much success as Infinity Ward had with Call of Duty 2 not even a complete year later.
While all of the previews and reviews both good and bad where piling up in the days before and very shortly after the game was released I was playing "COD3" really trying to get the feel for it and look at it from every angle.
COD3 begins with a standard tutorial explaining the basics of firing your rifle, melee attacks, and grenade tossing. The training mission leaves you with the feeling that COD3 feels much like COD2 but with enough changes to make you realize this is not the same game. Once the training mission is completed you are quickly informed that you are needed on the frontline. What happens next is an amazing contrast from COD2 as you are thrown quickly into an intense fight in the battle for St. Lo. The sights and sounds are almost overwhelming and the battle is intense, but alas it is very short lived and quickly you regroup with your squad. What follows can become somewhat of a disappointment for COD fans. Sure things have been added to the gameplay such as hand to hand combat and the ability to quickly throw grenades back at an enemy when they land at your feet, but there isn't enough variety to COD3 to push it beyond the level that we have already come to expect. In the end the gameplay additions come off as being gimmicky albeit well executed; especially in the case of returning grenades.
Where COD3 falls short is in the heart of the game, the single player. Not every person who owns a 360 plays online, so the single player aspect of
every game should be the main focal point. In previous COD games the odds seemed overwhelming and the frustration with the inability to pass a checkpoint would push you to play the same scenario over and over till you found just the right way to complete your mission. With COD3 however the checkpoints are roughly five feet apart and it takes almost no effort to complete your objectives so long as your troops follow you into combat. I say this because I've noticed a problem in the game in which your troops
suddenly stop in a position and refuse to continue on with you. The only way
to remedy this is to restart the level, as the last checkpoint may have already
been passed. Prior to the release of COD3 there was speculation that indicated
the normal difficulty setting would be somewhere in the range of Hard and Veteran difficulty levels in COD2. But after playing through a couple of the campaigns and many battles I have determined that this was grossly miscalculated. COD3 is actually quite easy and at times boring. There is no real motivation to continue playing the game after a while as it becomes monotonous. While riding on tanks calling out target locations or going off road with a jeep can be extremely gratifying these experiences are short lived and aren't terribly immersive. The single player campaign in COD3 is quite good but it doesn't do anything to trump the prior releases in the franchise, and I feel it will eventually be remembered as a mediocre entry to the series.
The multiplayer in COD3 has taken an entirely different approach than its predecessor. Large maps in COD2 are tiny when compared to the small maps in COD3. This game has been made with large multiplayer parties in mind. The usual gametypes are present in the form of Deathmatch and Capture the Flag, but the new gametype is called simply "War". War is essentially Capture the Flag on steroids; instead of taking a teams flag though you take various strategic points on a map starting with a common point in the middle. Once that location is taken you must advance to the next point which is closer to your opponents base. Once you have captured all of the points and the opponents base you win. This is easily the most compelling gametype present in COD3 and I can see people playing this one for months to come as the action is intense for the entire duration of the match. There is an interesting twist on Capture the Flag this time around. You must return the flag to the enemy's base which is a little hard to swallow at first but is easy enough to get the hang of. Otherwise
capture the flag remains unchanged. The huge difference in the multiplayer aspect of COD3 is the 24 player capability. So long as the game's popularity keeps up COD3 promises a fulfilling online experience for players willing to connect with random players to make a full match. My only concern is for the scores of people who choose not to deal with the sometimes harsh environment Xbox Live! can create for gamers. These people are then stuck trying to get as many friends in a room as possible because the maps just don't cater well to playing in small groups. As a minimum I wouldn't suggest playing with any less than eight players per team; less than that and the maps will just seem far too large. Hopefully with the release of map packs there will be some smaller maps so that this isn't such an issue.
Another huge addition to the multiplayer aspect of COD3 is the addition of player abilities. These include calling in air strikes, planting mines, healing friendly soldiers, and providing ammunition to your teammates. These special abilities can only be used in team based games. While the special abilities do add a nice bit of spice to the multiplayer they can become a nuisance when playing with people who don't use their role correctly or choose to be a sniper when you already have more than you need. The good news is once you select a role you don't have to stick with it throughout the entire match. If you notice that you don't have a medic on your team you can switch to that role once you are killed and respawn as a medic.
The weapons are vastly different in COD3, Where the sniper rifle was the order of the day for many players in COD2, the M1 Garand or a submachine gun may be a much more suitable weapon in COD3. Much of the punch that made the sniper rifle such an overpowering weapon in COD2 has been taken away as the amount of time you can hold your breath has been reduced and the aiming controls are far more realistic in COD3. In its place the M1 Garand is a quick firing weapon with a great deal of accuracy and stopping power. Getting used to the weapons in COD3 takes some time but the learning curve isn't too steep and there is a weapon to suit anyone's style.
COD3 is an extremely beautiful game. The landscapes are awe inspiring and the subtleties during battle are brilliant. The game camera is absolutely spot on; you will never find yourself getting lost in an area due to poor field of vision. I only rarely saw any framerate issues while playing, and what I did see certainly didn't take away from the experience. If you're looking for a WWII game for eye candy then look no further than COD3. If they could have gotten the gameplay up to the level of the visual presentation this game would be an absolute must own for anyone with a 360. My only complaint about the graphics in COD3 would be that sometimes the weapons block too much of your field of vision while aiming down the sights; it seems at times that your sights are taking up half of your screen and you can't see anything. Sometimes the weapon recoil can be disorienting but that just adds to the level of immersion in the game. Without the pure beauty of the game in general and especially in the multiplayer maps this game wouldn't have much going for it. The graphics bring the overall quality of COD3 up a couple notches on their own.
Not having ever been in any real life combat I can't say that I would know the sounds of the battlefield but COD3's soundtrack is every bit as good as Saving Private Ryan's or Band of Brothers so with that said this game sounds amazing. There are many times throughout the game when you are trying to be sneaky creeping around corners and it's just amazing to hear what is going on in the background. Anti Aircraft fire and machine guns in the distance along with the cries of soldiers from both the Axis and the Allies can really draw you deep into the experience. The guns, tanks, jeeps, grenades, soldiers etc. all sound absolutely perfect.
I have some seriously conflicting views when it comes to COD3. The game looks and sounds outstanding, it plays basically flawlessly and there are endless possibilities on the multiplayer side of things. So what is the problem? The Major draw of COD2 was the single player campaign portion of the game and it was perfect. This is where COD3 is lacking. The single player becomes boring and contrived. The other problem with COD3 is the 24 player push from Treyarch; they didn't even attempt to make the game fun for small parties. So basically if you don't have 23 people on your friend list that play COD3 on live at all times you're going to have to deal with the possibility of playing with some idiots on Xbox Live! If you don't mind going that route then the game is going to be a sure thing for you so go for it. But if you've never played a COD game on the 360 then I suggest saving yourself the cash and buying COD2 first. I can recommend COD3 whole heartedly knowing that it isn't a perfect game, for all its faults it's still a very solid title. Recommended.
While all of the previews and reviews both good and bad where piling up in the days before and very shortly after the game was released I was playing "COD3" really trying to get the feel for it and look at it from every angle.
COD3 begins with a standard tutorial explaining the basics of firing your rifle, melee attacks, and grenade tossing. The training mission leaves you with the feeling that COD3 feels much like COD2 but with enough changes to make you realize this is not the same game. Once the training mission is completed you are quickly informed that you are needed on the frontline. What happens next is an amazing contrast from COD2 as you are thrown quickly into an intense fight in the battle for St. Lo. The sights and sounds are almost overwhelming and the battle is intense, but alas it is very short lived and quickly you regroup with your squad. What follows can become somewhat of a disappointment for COD fans. Sure things have been added to the gameplay such as hand to hand combat and the ability to quickly throw grenades back at an enemy when they land at your feet, but there isn't enough variety to COD3 to push it beyond the level that we have already come to expect. In the end the gameplay additions come off as being gimmicky albeit well executed; especially in the case of returning grenades.
Where COD3 falls short is in the heart of the game, the single player. Not every person who owns a 360 plays online, so the single player aspect of
every game should be the main focal point. In previous COD games the odds seemed overwhelming and the frustration with the inability to pass a checkpoint would push you to play the same scenario over and over till you found just the right way to complete your mission. With COD3 however the checkpoints are roughly five feet apart and it takes almost no effort to complete your objectives so long as your troops follow you into combat. I say this because I've noticed a problem in the game in which your troops
suddenly stop in a position and refuse to continue on with you. The only way
to remedy this is to restart the level, as the last checkpoint may have already
been passed. Prior to the release of COD3 there was speculation that indicated
the normal difficulty setting would be somewhere in the range of Hard and Veteran difficulty levels in COD2. But after playing through a couple of the campaigns and many battles I have determined that this was grossly miscalculated. COD3 is actually quite easy and at times boring. There is no real motivation to continue playing the game after a while as it becomes monotonous. While riding on tanks calling out target locations or going off road with a jeep can be extremely gratifying these experiences are short lived and aren't terribly immersive. The single player campaign in COD3 is quite good but it doesn't do anything to trump the prior releases in the franchise, and I feel it will eventually be remembered as a mediocre entry to the series.
The multiplayer in COD3 has taken an entirely different approach than its predecessor. Large maps in COD2 are tiny when compared to the small maps in COD3. This game has been made with large multiplayer parties in mind. The usual gametypes are present in the form of Deathmatch and Capture the Flag, but the new gametype is called simply "War". War is essentially Capture the Flag on steroids; instead of taking a teams flag though you take various strategic points on a map starting with a common point in the middle. Once that location is taken you must advance to the next point which is closer to your opponents base. Once you have captured all of the points and the opponents base you win. This is easily the most compelling gametype present in COD3 and I can see people playing this one for months to come as the action is intense for the entire duration of the match. There is an interesting twist on Capture the Flag this time around. You must return the flag to the enemy's base which is a little hard to swallow at first but is easy enough to get the hang of. Otherwise
capture the flag remains unchanged. The huge difference in the multiplayer aspect of COD3 is the 24 player capability. So long as the game's popularity keeps up COD3 promises a fulfilling online experience for players willing to connect with random players to make a full match. My only concern is for the scores of people who choose not to deal with the sometimes harsh environment Xbox Live! can create for gamers. These people are then stuck trying to get as many friends in a room as possible because the maps just don't cater well to playing in small groups. As a minimum I wouldn't suggest playing with any less than eight players per team; less than that and the maps will just seem far too large. Hopefully with the release of map packs there will be some smaller maps so that this isn't such an issue.
Another huge addition to the multiplayer aspect of COD3 is the addition of player abilities. These include calling in air strikes, planting mines, healing friendly soldiers, and providing ammunition to your teammates. These special abilities can only be used in team based games. While the special abilities do add a nice bit of spice to the multiplayer they can become a nuisance when playing with people who don't use their role correctly or choose to be a sniper when you already have more than you need. The good news is once you select a role you don't have to stick with it throughout the entire match. If you notice that you don't have a medic on your team you can switch to that role once you are killed and respawn as a medic.
The weapons are vastly different in COD3, Where the sniper rifle was the order of the day for many players in COD2, the M1 Garand or a submachine gun may be a much more suitable weapon in COD3. Much of the punch that made the sniper rifle such an overpowering weapon in COD2 has been taken away as the amount of time you can hold your breath has been reduced and the aiming controls are far more realistic in COD3. In its place the M1 Garand is a quick firing weapon with a great deal of accuracy and stopping power. Getting used to the weapons in COD3 takes some time but the learning curve isn't too steep and there is a weapon to suit anyone's style.
COD3 is an extremely beautiful game. The landscapes are awe inspiring and the subtleties during battle are brilliant. The game camera is absolutely spot on; you will never find yourself getting lost in an area due to poor field of vision. I only rarely saw any framerate issues while playing, and what I did see certainly didn't take away from the experience. If you're looking for a WWII game for eye candy then look no further than COD3. If they could have gotten the gameplay up to the level of the visual presentation this game would be an absolute must own for anyone with a 360. My only complaint about the graphics in COD3 would be that sometimes the weapons block too much of your field of vision while aiming down the sights; it seems at times that your sights are taking up half of your screen and you can't see anything. Sometimes the weapon recoil can be disorienting but that just adds to the level of immersion in the game. Without the pure beauty of the game in general and especially in the multiplayer maps this game wouldn't have much going for it. The graphics bring the overall quality of COD3 up a couple notches on their own.
Not having ever been in any real life combat I can't say that I would know the sounds of the battlefield but COD3's soundtrack is every bit as good as Saving Private Ryan's or Band of Brothers so with that said this game sounds amazing. There are many times throughout the game when you are trying to be sneaky creeping around corners and it's just amazing to hear what is going on in the background. Anti Aircraft fire and machine guns in the distance along with the cries of soldiers from both the Axis and the Allies can really draw you deep into the experience. The guns, tanks, jeeps, grenades, soldiers etc. all sound absolutely perfect.
I have some seriously conflicting views when it comes to COD3. The game looks and sounds outstanding, it plays basically flawlessly and there are endless possibilities on the multiplayer side of things. So what is the problem? The Major draw of COD2 was the single player campaign portion of the game and it was perfect. This is where COD3 is lacking. The single player becomes boring and contrived. The other problem with COD3 is the 24 player push from Treyarch; they didn't even attempt to make the game fun for small parties. So basically if you don't have 23 people on your friend list that play COD3 on live at all times you're going to have to deal with the possibility of playing with some idiots on Xbox Live! If you don't mind going that route then the game is going to be a sure thing for you so go for it. But if you've never played a COD game on the 360 then I suggest saving yourself the cash and buying COD2 first. I can recommend COD3 whole heartedly knowing that it isn't a perfect game, for all its faults it's still a very solid title. Recommended.