World War 3

60%
Game Brain Score Based on 28,992 reviews
  • gameplay
  • optimization
  • graphics
World War 3 Game Cover
View game
Get on Steam

"World War 3" is a multiplayer tactical first-person shooter set in a modern global conflict. Engage in thrilling skirmishes across real-world locations, utilizing a wide range of weapons, vehicles, drones, and tactical strikes. Fight through stunningly detailed maps, with every shot and decision potentially crucial to your team's victory. Customize your loadout and collaborate with your team to outgun and outflank your enemies.

  • PC
  • Windows
  • Cloud
  • NVIDIA GeForce NOW
Genres & TagsPlay Modes

Reviews

60%
Audience ScoreBased on 28,992 reviews
gameplay1,549 positive mentions
optimization600 negative mentions
  • gameplay3,637 mentions

    The gameplay of "World War 3" has received mixed reviews, with many players praising its fun mechanics, extensive weapon customization, and a blend of tactical and arcade elements reminiscent of both Battlefield and Call of Duty. However, issues such as server instability, bugs, and performance problems have marred the experience for some, leading to frustration during matches. Overall, while the core gameplay is considered solid and enjoyable, it still requires significant optimization and balancing to reach its full potential.

    • “The gameplay is fun, it has customization for your soldier along with weapons, and many other things.”
    • “The gameplay is refreshing but my god, third-party launchers are a curse, especially if it's from a Russian company like my.games.”
    • “The gameplay is great when you get into an actual match (assuming you get into a server near your region).”
    • “I had fun for about 2 hours in this and couldn't handle the janky gameplay much more after that, have tried off and on to get back into it, and I just cannot.”
    • “The gameplay is a deformed baby of battlefield and a generic tactical shooter, which ends up being not fun at all.”
    • “The gameplay itself can be quite boring.”
  • optimization2,048 mentions

    The optimization of the game has received mixed reviews, with many players reporting significant performance issues, including stuttering, low frame rates, and server lag. While some users note improvements over time, particularly in recent updates, the overall consensus is that the game still requires substantial optimization to be fully playable, especially on lower-end systems. Many players express frustration with the game's performance, indicating that it detracts from the otherwise enjoyable gameplay experience.

    • “Optimization has improved and new content is nice and clearly thought out.”
    • “The performance is great and optimization.”
    • “After few months I tried this game again and now it's much better, the game got better optimization and works more smooth, gameplay is fast and dynamic so you will not get bored on the battlefield, I would call this project one of the most ambitious FPS games for this year.”
    • “Horrible optimization and gun sounds like popcorn.”
    • “The game isn't optimized at all.”
    • “This game could not be more of an unoptimized pile of garbage.”
  • graphics1,658 mentions

    The graphics of World War 3 have received mixed reviews, with many players praising the game's clean visuals, impressive lighting, and detailed environments that evoke a modern battlefield aesthetic. However, concerns about optimization persist, as numerous users report performance issues, including frame rate drops and inconsistent graphical fidelity, particularly on lower-end hardware. Overall, while the graphics are generally considered good for an indie title, there is a consensus that further optimization and refinement are needed to fully realize their potential.

    • “Graphically, the game is very good looking, with solid lighting, textures and atmosphere.”
    • “The graphics are outstanding and the game ran as smooth as your mother's butt as expected on my Strix 4090.”
    • “The graphics are really neat and in many ways this game is much better than nowadays Battlefield.”
    • “The game supposedly boasts improved lighting and graphical fidelity, but it somehow looks worse, feels worse, and is a chore to play.”
    • “The graphics are poor and date back to 2015; the gunplay is a mishmash of Tarkov meets Rainbow Six Siege, shoddy with janky animations.”
    • “Another negative thing that needs to be pointed out right now is the graphics and optimization; the graphics in-game look nothing like the trailers we were shown, with an 8700k @5.1 /strix 1070 ti +75 core +150 mem, running at 3440x1440 and a mixture of high and ultra at 120 fov the textures look like a blurry mess and there is stuttering throughout.”
  • stability815 mentions

    The game's stability is a significant concern among players, with many reporting frequent bugs, glitches, and server issues that hinder gameplay. While some users note improvements over time, the overall experience remains marred by connectivity problems, long loading times, and inconsistent performance. Despite these challenges, a portion of the player base still finds enjoyment in the core mechanics, suggesting potential for future enhancements as the developers continue to address these issues.

    • “Not buggy or slow, does not need the most expensive equipment to run smoothly, always lots of servers and clean, non-glitchy players on every server.”
    • “Now that they've re-re-released after going dark for a while, I can say they've put a huge amount of work into the stability of the game; it runs great.”
    • “The game runs great and looks good for an early access game.”
    • “It's a buggy mess lately that either won't let me in at all or the servers crash an hour or so after I start playing.”
    • “The game is still buggy but its still in early access so can't say anything but I'd like to point out that:”
    • “The game launched in a buggy trash ridden unpolished mess that still has barely been fixed and still won't run on 60% of rigs.”
  • monetization322 mentions

    The monetization strategy of the game has drawn significant criticism, with many players labeling it a "cash grab" following its transition to a free-to-play model. Concerns center around the prevalence of microtransactions, particularly for cosmetics and battle passes, which detract from the gameplay experience and progression. Players express frustration over the game's state, feeling that the developers have prioritized profit over quality and player engagement, leading to a dwindling player base and a lack of meaningful content.

    • “This game is shaping up to be very impressive and one of the only shooter titles out there currently that values structure and feedback over monetization and excessively unrealistic mechanics.”
    • “Matches are quick and fast-paced, and you can unlock more weapons and attachments by playing the game (as of now, no other microtransactions to pay to unlock more guns, etc.).”
    • “I wouldn't have a problem with cosmetic in-game purchases or something of that sort to keep the money coming in.”
    • “It has already been abandoned by the devs. At this point, it's simply a cash grab they left up to pull in $$$ for their next title which is already in the works.”
    • “Game is dead and full of pay-to-win microtransactions.”
    • “The game had huge potential but now the player base is nonexistent and the only way to save the game is to exploit the paying customers and turn it into a free-to-play game with microtransactions.”
  • grinding195 mentions

    The grinding aspect of the game has received overwhelmingly negative feedback, with players expressing frustration over the excessive time required to unlock weapons, attachments, and customizations. Many reviews highlight the grind as tedious and unbalanced, often feeling like a chore rather than an enjoyable part of gameplay, with some players suggesting that it detracts from the overall experience. While a few users find the grind addictive and rewarding, the consensus leans towards it being overly demanding and unoptimized, leading to a lack of fun and engagement.

    • “It's better XP now, so it's not that grindy. The only gripe I may have is the sound (will be better, I've read) and maybe some more destruction, but everything else I do love!”
    • “No grinding, just load up and fight.”
    • “A bit grindy sometimes.”
    • “The grinding is still ridiculous, and the matchmaking has gotten worse.”
    • “One of my biggest complaints is the never-ending grinding that must occur to level up not only your character, but your weapons as well.”
    • “Each weapon unlocks in the form of a non-customizable 'blueprint.' This means that in order to customize those weapons I need to grind through hours and hours of gameplay to eventually unlock those weapons, and then even more hours of grinding to unlock the attachments.”
  • story150 mentions

    The consensus among users is that the game lacks a meaningful story, with many reviews explicitly stating "no story" or expressing a desire for a story mode. Some players have noted the absence of a campaign or narrative elements, while others have suggested that the game could benefit from AI bots or a structured storyline to enhance gameplay. Overall, the game's narrative aspect is seen as a significant shortcoming.

    • “Instead of leaving an actual review, allow me to tell you a story.”
    • “I'd like to know the backstory and the development of the war that the west will most likely become the victor of.”
    • “The future is looking bright; it even looks as though they may be doing a campaign-style multiplayer mission, like the ones you see in Rising Storm Vietnam.”
    • “The game currently has no story to speak of.”
    • “Add a story mode or something so people that bought your game can play it.”
    • “I wish for a story mode.”
  • humor123 mentions

    The humor in the game is frequently highlighted as a major draw, with players enjoying the absurdity of gameplay mechanics, funny voice lines, and unexpected glitches. Many reviews mention moments of laughter during gameplay, whether from comical animations, unbalanced scorestreaks, or humorous soldier chatter, creating a lighthearted atmosphere despite the game's serious setting. Overall, the game's quirky and often chaotic nature contributes to a fun experience, making it appealing for those who appreciate a blend of humor and action.

    • “But hey, if you're a fan of weird and funny free-to-play games that require your soul and undivided attention where 'supposed' grizzled soldiers fighting in World War 3 can control recoil like a baby one-handing a double barrel, then this game is for you.”
    • “Been on a bumpy ride since alpha but I can honestly say I've enjoyed it all even sometimes when the server had match loading issues it was just funny after.”
    • “Ww3 in its current state is nothing more than a fun AF FPS with some annoying, albeit hilarious, bugs and is quite unbalanced at the moment too.”
    • “Maps for that other mode are too big and vehicles are like an unfunny joke.”
    • “Very obsolete graphical models and not funny gaming at all.”
  • atmosphere87 mentions

    The game's atmosphere is generally praised for its realistic graphics, immersive battlefield feel, and gritty aesthetic, drawing comparisons to titles like Battlefield 3 and 4. However, many players note that sound design is a significant area for improvement, as it can detract from the overall experience, leading to moments of quiet that feel lacking in life. While the atmosphere is compelling and engaging, there are calls for more dynamic elements and background sounds to enhance immersion further.

    • “The atmosphere is great, and the gunplay is phenomenal.”
    • “Gunplay is great, atmosphere and aesthetic are on point and teamwork actually happens.”
    • “Great atmosphere, graphics, effects, gunplay, and game modes.”
    • “Boring, lack of players, no atmosphere.”
    • “Better off getting battlefield games, there is no atmosphere, servers lack players and a load of campers everywhere.”
    • “Atmosphere is very lacking for the moment.”
  • music76 mentions

    The music in the game receives mixed reviews, with some players praising the loading screen music and ambient tracks for enhancing the experience, while others criticize the in-game soundtrack as underwhelming and often drowned out by sound effects. Many users express frustration over inconsistent sound levels and the lack of music during critical gameplay moments, which detracts from immersion. Overall, while there are highlights, the music aspect is seen as needing significant improvement.

    • “Bf3's soundtrack still gives me exciting goosebumps.”
    • “The soundtrack is great, having a well-balanced mix of intensity and low-toned backing that really gives that edge to gunfights and rounding corners.”
    • “The music is excellent and does not hinder the user from gameplay.”
    • “The biggest downside for me is the soundtrack.”
    • “Combine that with a shitty res interface and lack of music in the battlefield style map just before you spawn, and it just breaks immersion and hope for this... attempt.”
    • “The menus don't have music so you're just sitting there at nothing not knowing whether the game crashed or it's just slow.”
  • emotional43 mentions

    The emotional responses to the game are mixed, with many players expressing disappointment and frustration due to technical issues and gameplay mechanics that detract from their experience. While some find moments of satisfaction and connection to the game's themes, the overwhelming sentiment is one of heartbreak and regret, as players feel let down by the game's execution and the lack of support from developers. Overall, the emotional impact ranges from feelings of anger and betrayal to fleeting moments of enjoyment, highlighting a significant disconnect between player expectations and the game's current state.

    • “Update: after trying it for 30 minutes, I feel especially wronged, because redeeming my money would slightly heal the emotional damage I have after playing this sorry excuse for a game.”
    • “This is the most heartfelt thumbs down by a person that so very much wanted this to work!”
    • “I play games like Battlefield to feel good, to relieve stress; all this 'game' has done is made me feel terrible about myself for things out of my control that were not thought of when putting this game out into early access.”
  • replayability38 mentions

    The game's replayability is a mixed bag among users; while many praise its incredible replay value, engaging mechanics, and enjoyable gameplay, some express disappointment, feeling that it lacks sufficient replayability for their tastes. Continuous updates and optimizations have improved the game's playability, but concerns about player retention and server activity remain. Overall, the game shows potential for replayability, especially with its customization options and balanced gameplay, but it still faces challenges in maintaining a consistent player base.

    • “The replayability of this game is incredible.”
    • “The graphics are stunning, the sound is great, and the gameplay has all of the ingredients to be a replayable masterpiece.”
    • “The customization is amazing, guns feel great, pace is balanced, and replay value is outstanding-- it's honestly such a wonderful comeback to the BF3 formula that I missed so much.”
    • “Also, the replayability isn't there for me at least.”
    • “While this game is certainly in a much more playable state than at release, and I feel like a multitude of optimization, patching, and balancing has been implemented, a multiplayer driven game cannot survive without a steady stream of players, and this game continually struggles to rise to a 100 player average.”
    • “I understand this is a beta, but I have played betas that are in better shape than this and they actually are playable when you hit the play button.”
  • character development2 mentions

    Players appreciate the character development in the game, noting that it enhances the sense of progression and makes the experience of grinding levels feel more rewarding.

    • “I really appreciate the character development they added; grinding levels feels rewarding now.”
    • “The character development in this game is fantastic, making each level-up feel meaningful.”
    • “The depth of character development enhances the overall experience, making me invested in my character's journey.”
Positive mentions (%)Positive
Neutral mentions (%)Neutral
Negative mentions (%)Negative

Buy World War 3

Play time

7hMedian play time
42hAverage play time
3-24hSpent by most gamers
*Based on 317 analyzed playthroughs

Videos

Similar Games

Game News