Call of Duty® (2003)
Fair · Shooter · 2006
Steam Deck PlayableThe verdict
WAIT.
A BANGER at $7.86, only fair at $19.99.
- Length
- 6.9h
- Value
- $2.90/hr
- Reviews
- 95% positive
Watch this gameOne email when it is worth buying. Your call on what that means.
Get one email when Call of Duty® (2003) is worth buying.
One email per game. Unsubscribe in a click.
Minimum on the Steam store: 123 MB of memory, 1.4 GB of storage. Windows only.
Call of Duty® delivers the gritty realism and cinematic intensity of World War II's epic battlefield moments like never before.
What drives the score
How to read this
Every input gets a grade, S to D, read from the buyer's side. The score is multiplicative, so an input only counts as raising when it sits near the top of its own scale. Anything with real room left is holding the score back, because that room is the gap to 100. ▲ marks a lift, ▼ a drag or a dock, ? an input we do not have, • a fact this genre's score does not use. The exact weights stay secret.
The value story
November 2019 is where it bottomed out, at $7.99. Its cuts run 50 percent off as a rule. There have been 86 in the 13 years tracked, about 7 weeks apart. Today it is at full price. The last sale was about 3 weeks ago, and on this game's rhythm the next one tends to arrive within 7 weeks. $7.86 is what it would take to make this a BANGER, and nothing in its history goes that low.
Against its own genre it lands in the top 16 percent on value. It is pricier than 82 percent of its genre, and better reviewed than 95 percent. Among the games that feel like it, Call of Duty® 2 ($19.99, scores 69) beats it on value, while it beats Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45 ($4.99, scores 63).
15 of the 582 Steam-purchase reviews sampled here come from buyers who refunded the game, sampled from reviews written March 2020 to August 2026. That is more refunded reviewers than 7 in 10 paid games this site has sampled to the same depth, and among the 725 games in its genre sampled this deeply, 138 have a larger share. Inside the two-hour refund window, 84 percent of the 767 reviews written there were positive, against 95 percent overall, and those are 11 percent of everything written about it.
Players
60 players at peak in the last day.
The chart appears once this game has been counted more than once.Player counts via SteamSpy.
What players say
A timeless classic filled with some A-list actors like Jason Statham who voiced one of the British soldiers during the campaign, no comment on multiplayer as I never played it
My negative review is not because of the game itself. The original Call of Duty is actually a very well made game with engaging gameplay and a story on-par for a WWII game in the vein of Medal of Honor. Plus, its multiplayer mode, while I've never fully explored it, has proven impactful in the world of multiplayer FPS games and I cannot deny its influence. My negative review is because of Activision. Without...
Player reviews from Steam: the most helpful all-time, plus the newest that clear the same quality bar, with the hours each player had put in when they wrote it. The mix of Recommended and Not recommended follows the game's Steam ratio. Rotates daily. Opinions are theirs.
No data upstream: achievement curve (Steam global achievements).
Cite this score
Embed the live badge, copy the line, or download the card.
Call of Duty® (2003) scores 67/100 on the BANG Score (fair value). The BANG Score rates what a game is worth for the money. Via Steam BANGERS. https://steambangers.com/game/2620/call-of-duty-2003The BANG Score is one number for value, 0 to 100: price against how it reviews and how long it was built to be. It answers the money question and stops there; whether the game is for you is still your call.
Reviews set the ceiling and price moves you inside it, so a cheap game that reviews badly cannot climb. Ratings from few reviewers are shrunk toward the middle, so 100 percent from nine people does not outrank 96 percent from ninety thousand. Length comes from HowLongToBeat where it can be matched, measured against a per-genre floor so a five-hour narrative game is judged against other narrative games rather than against a sixty-hour RPG. Where no verified length exists the score says so and carries a dock, because the biggest input is then a guess. The full method, including where it is weak → Steam reviews as of Aug 1, price as of Sep 24.
A number here look wrong? Tell me what it got wrong and I will look at the inputs behind it.