Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3's failure blamed on Modern Warfare 2's budget

For the most part, the newly released Call of Duty games offer what fans need: a thrilling, high-octane single-player campaign, a robust traditional multiplayer offering and depending on the sub-series, even some good old Zombies. Unfortunately, at least for the single-player campaign, this year's Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III hit a low point for the series and by most accounts, hasn't been all very well received by the community.

In my review of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III, I scored the game 5/10, writing, “In a year that has brought us so much joy with some amazing video game releases, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III somehow manages to lower the tone.”

Just days after its release, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III achieved a Metacritic score of just (now) 55, so surely it couldn't get any worse, right? Unfortunately, it did, at least according to its fanbase. In addition to the critic's score of 53, users of Metacritic scored Modern Warfare III just 1.7, making it the worst-rated Call of Duty ever.

So why has Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III been so ill-received? Some have blamed its short campaign, while others have raised that it was reportedly an expansion before morphing into a standalone game.

Apparently, however, according to a tweet shared by Twitter user Byeong Gyu Park which featured a screenshot from a LinkedIn CV taken from an apparent developer of the Call of Duty series, fans are blaming the failure of Modern Warfare III on the budget of the $250 million MWII (2022).