Please login to submit a screenshot

"A definite oddball of the Call of Duty series, but remains strong."

Disclaimer: This review only covers the single player portion of the campaign; however, I have played the multiplayer portion enough to justify a 'mini-review.' Plus I apologize for any awkward sentences and spelling errors; I am lazy.

Summary-

Pros:
-Call of Duty in its glory
-New weapons absent from Call of Duty 2
-Vehicles, on rail and actually driving
-AI still is fairly and I stress fairly stable
-Good graphics

Cons:
-Glitches
-Strange lack of multiplayer weapons
-Audio oddities
-Unpolished feel

However, do not be fooled by the number of pros and cons, the pros considerably outclass their counterparts.

Introduction:

Call of Duty 3 is a first person shooter that pits the player on different fronts of the Normandy Breakout leading up to the liberation of Paris while taking control of American, Canadian, British, and Polish troops along with the help of the French Resistance along the way. The game has a 14 level, or chapter as they are named, campaign. Each chapter is fought by one of the aforementioned allied sides. The multiplayer is strictly limited to system link and xbox live play, with no apparent split-screen or offline multiplayer functions.

Gameplay:

Anyone familiar with the Call of Duty franchise will feel at home, especially as the game remains similar to its predecessors, but improves upon the franchise and in some respects, takes a few steps back. Players begin each chapter with set weapons depending on their nationality. Americans usually find themselves with a Thompson and M1 Garand, while the other nationalities are usually pitted with British weapons such as the Sten, Lee-Enfield, Bren, and the like.

Now, for the actual gameplay. You hide, pop up, shoot, hide, pop up, shoot, and continue will dispatch any common enemy. But in the sequences without any sort of viable cover or when the player is pitted in close quarters, run and gun style tactics easily prevail. Which poses a problem because unlike Call of Duty 2, the entire game, for the most part feels as if it could be played like a run and gun shooter save select areas where MG42's or armor are present. Mind you there are A LOT of MG42 machine gun emplacements, but again, they can be easily side stepped or ignored with the use of cover. Cover, another slight change the game is the presence of destructible cover, however, this cover apparently is limited only to wooden boxes. Although this function improves the realism of the game, it simply proves to be annoying.

Lastly, the gameplay is fun and instense in most cases. For me, forced into a defensive position against a superior enemy is always more fun than a struggling offensive up some heavily defended hill...

Graphics:

The graphics are fairly good and suprised me that I had dismissed my orginal Xbox so quickly. Although I am probably typing out of ignorance here, I would go as far to say it is one of the better games for the original Xbox right now, but clearly is not a must have game that every one MUST have, like a Halo or a Gears of War. There are some graphical drops, mainly in terrain, but the CG like graphics of the cutscenes and in general are fairly good.

Sound:

I do not have any sort of top notch sound system, but the guns sound somewhat muffled and quieter than normal save two weapons in particular. The trench gun sounds as if it were and 88 German Flak/Artillery Weapon and the MP44 sounds incredibly loud in comparison also. I have no way of knowing whether this is a very strange occurence, for me in particular, or a universal problem, but increases the oddity of the game, which continues below.

Other:

Continuing from above, there are some very strange problems this game has. Although patches will most likely improve the game, they still exist and all of them are probably not simply fixes. When used the Pak *some number that escapes me* to eliminate armored cars, there was no explosion from the shell exploding and soldiers would simply vanish. Guns are sometimes seen through walls and enemies spawning out of nowhere are somewhat visible, but can be avoided. I could go on, but it is not really necessary since this should not be a deciding factor.

Multiplayer:

I have played the 360 version at a friend's house and seen many problems that exist. Many weapons are apparently not present such as the Gewehr as an Axis weapon. A better list can probably be found on the boards along with other current problems or improvements. However, the mulitplayer is enjoyable.
In addition, I should mention the class system much like Return to Castle Wolfenstein or Battlefield.

Conclusion:

The game is fun, online and offline, despite the rare, but noticeable errors. The game, in general, lacks the polished approach of Call of Duty 2, but is more flexible (i.e. players can choose their own paths and some open ended "feeling" sections). Although the 360 version of the game is probably the way to go mainly for the extended multiplayer support and achievement points, but otherwise, you cannot really go wrong with either version, 360 or original.

Final Score: About 8.5 since fractions cannot be given.


Reviewer's Score: 8/10, Originally Posted: 01/02/07