Agreed. That was just awful.
Care to explain why? I'm not a big fan of the Call of Duty series (although the first two games were fantastic) but I don't get all this hate towards their single player campaigns.
I think that the problem is that most people approach the game with unrealistic expectations. It's not an open world game, it's a linear cinematic shooter. Everyone saying that the game was bad because it was all scripted or because they hit some invisible walls are not being fair.
Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.
If you played the game expecting something that didn't look like it was just a bunch of random tom clancy storylines mashed together then your expectations were wrong. If someone buys Skyrim expecting a fantasy multiplayer game then they are of course going to be disappointed.
I personally had a lot of fun with the campaign in MW3. It had a nice selection of weapons and gadgets and it managed to keep me on the edge of my seat the entire time. It's not a game that I would play again, and I certainly wouldn't recommend it due to its story and setting, but I had fun playing it.
It's the same problem Doom 3 had. It makes me facepalm every time people complain about the scripted scenes and that it was a "corridor-shooter". Did they really expect anything else? Did they not play the first games?