It seems that headline has been changed, and toned down, at least once - the URL reveals the Mail originally said the game 'recreates 7/7 Tube bomb attacks' rather than 'features 7/7 Tube bomb-style attacks'.
The article explains:
In one particularly vivid shot, an armed soldier on a truck cuts in front of a Tube carriage, derailing and causing it to explode.
Despite being 'ultra-violent' and causing such 'fury', the Mail has helpfully embedded the game's trailer at the end of their article. It does indeed show a truck ramming into a Tube train and causing it to derail.
But there's no explosion of that Tube carriage in the trailer. There's no bomb attack. There's no suicide bomb attack. There's no recreation of 7/7. There's no 7/7 bomb-style attack.
Indeed, the quote that ends the article, from Activision, the makers of the game, makes clear:
'The scenes in the game are entirely fictional and are not intended to recreate any historical events.'
So what of the 'fury'? The Mail claims:
Supporters of those affected by the 7/7 suicide attacks in July 2005, which killed 52 people, called for Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 to be banned.
It's not clear who these 'supporters' are. The article only manages to produce one outrage quote and that comes from Mail favourites Mediawatch-UK. And although they say, rather predictably, that the game is in 'incredibly poor taste' they don't actually say it should be banned. Nor does anyone else in the article.
(More on the Mail's article from Minority Thought and CVG. See also a CVG post on the Mail's misleading article 'Playing football games on computers 'makes you more aggressive'' from a few weeks ago.)